I don’t normally get involved in politically charged discussions; I’m too dumb (as most of us are on such issues if we are honest). However, my brother-in-law (Andy) recently made a post concerning President Obama’s statement that he would be willing to be a one-term president if it meant the health care reform bill was passed. Andy makes an interesting point concerning the principle for which Obama is standing and his desire to follow through on something he truly believes in regardless of his popularity. To a large degree, President Bush did the same thing with the war in Iraq. Andy then goes on to question the legitimacy of such a principle when the foundation for all political life is the heart of the people. So, the core of the question is this: Is Obama’s contentment to be a one-term president a fundamental misunderstanding of his position? Or, at the end of the day, do we elect a president to lead and guide our country based on their ideas and policies for which we elected them regardless of the current majority view of Americans on any particular topic (such as health care reform)? And if there is a middle ground, what is it?