Roy Moore or bust

That's my opinion, and it will take a nuclear blast to change it.

The only way I can explain it is by using the General Grant example.  Lincoln wanted Grant even though he was a reported drunk.  The reason Lincoln gave was that Grant would fight ( and win ).  As for the winning part, there were generals in that war that would fight, but Grant knew how to win, too.

There were those at the time who thought that Grant should have been removed.  Imagine that.  All those generals Lincoln turned to were losing the war.  Here you find Grant, and these people think it was more important to have a guy with impeccable morals, as opposed to a guy who would fight and win.  What is the objective but to win?  Why bother fighting the war at all if you are not out to win?  Does it make sense to get rid of someone who can win?  Only if the point of it all is NOT to win, in my opinion.

And so it goes with Moore.  Moore can win, and he will fight the culture war.  Our country needs him like Lincoln needed Grant.  Even if the allegations are true, I say keep him anyway.  Only when he violates a law, gets indicted for it, and subsequently convicted, do you remove him from office.

Frankly, all the sexual harassment stuff is bravo sierra as far as I am concerned.  If women put themselves in harm's way, then this goes with the territory.  Don't go home to mommy boohooing about some guy getting fresh with you, little girl.  You play with the big dogs, you get big fleas.  Grow the f**k up.