Of course, Moore and his disciples will dismiss this lack of enthusiasm for his entry into the Alabama governor's race as just another example of The Star's editorial stance. This page has been critical of Moore ever since he warmed the bench in Gadsden; that opinion hasn't changed.
But just in case there are those who have forgotten what Moore did for and to this state, let's offer this reminder.
As a judge, sworn to uphold the law, Moore used his office to promote his own brand of Christianity and, in the process, advance his political career. This editorial board does not take issue with the sincerity of his beliefs or with his right to express those beliefs privately. But to use state resources and taxpayer money as a vehicle to further his own causes crossed not only the line that separates church and state, but it raised serious ethical questions about his willingness to waste public money on private endeavors.
By placing the now-famous Ten Commandments monument in the state judiciary building, then-Chief Justice Moore threw the state into expensive litigation at a time when the budget could ill afford it. However, had the courts said that monument was legal and appropriate, good residents would have shaken their heads, expressed their disagreement and abided by the law.
But not Moore. When he was told to remove the monument, he refused, claimed the judge lacked the authority to issue such an order, defied the law and kept up a fight that in the end cost Alabama a lot of money and the chief justice his job.
Now he is back in the public eye, only this time as a more moderate, thoughtful candidate, one interested in the economy, jobs, businesses and schools, and less concerned with the religious and cultural controversies he courted in the past.
Indeed, when one of his supporters circulated a letter accusing the public schools of "indoctrinating our children through a multicultural mix of communism, Islam, New Age and anything that goes, except Christianity," his campaign quickly dismissed the person as someone who "means well but does not speak for Judge Moore."
Maybe so. But when addressing his defenders, the issues that often excite them are not education and economics, but God, abortion, gambling and same-sex marriage.
It will be interesting to see if Moore can convince his followers to become committed to solving the state's secular problems. Or, perhaps, if those followers will convince Moore that if he is going to keep them in his camp, he had best not stray from the accepted text.
If the past is any indication, Moore will follow the course laid down in football as well as in politics. He will "dance with what brung him."