Why Alabama voters must spite the experts again

Up until one week ago, the worst thing one could claim about Judge Roy Moore was that he stood for the Ten Commandments as a judge and ticked off the ACLU.  While arguments exist constitutionally around that particular matter, Moore's actions in doing so were certainly not indicative of a man with a weak character who would exploit young ladies.  In fact, he stood for something and risked losing a political position.

Another matter that put Moore's political post at risk was his stance on marriage.  Again, he didn't go along to get along.  He stood for what he believes in.  His steel spine is yet another objective fact we're able to consider.

This is why Alabama voters trust Moore, who has proven himself when he promises to stand on important issues: religious liberty, securing our borders (which includes building a wall), the Second Amendment, protecting the unborn, etc.  

This is unlike a lot of the so-called holier-than-thou "Republicans" in Washington who had no problem working with Ted Kennedy, who left a woman to die in his car, and other liberals in Congress.  They are the same ones who continually take stands to bash the current president after they refused to stand against the Obama regime for eight years.  They embody the swamp that Moore threatens.

One has every right to (and must) objectively take all of the information into consideration.  It doesn't matter that the same corrupt media (who waited to bring these charges forward until it was too late to remove Moore's name from the ballot) trotted out dozens more individuals to claim that this alleged behavior is something Alabamans knew about all along.  In fact, to many, it seems even more preposterous.  That's dozens more who allegedly knew something for almost forty years who a) did not come forward in any of the Alabama judge's multiple local elections, b) did not come forward when he was in the Alabama primary earlier this year, and c) did not come forward when he was facing off with Luther Strange in the recent runoff.

Given the lack of credibility that many of these questionable enterprises have displayed in the past versus the credibility Judge Moore exuded as a public servant for decades, we must continue to be the voices of reason we were in 2016 – even if it enrages entrenched power-brokers in the D.C. establishment.

As such, we should understand why we find ourselves unfairly subjected to a brutal Catch-22 scenario concocted by the media and political establishment.  Thus, we either accept the idea of a pro-abortion, open-borders liberal candidate being the better choice or resist the narrative based on our own thinking and risk being labeled as sympathizers to child-molesters.

We've been called lots of things that were untrue before.  This, too, shall pass.