If you want to be governor of a state, it is a good idea to not only know your state but also want to keep doing the things the state is doing successfully.

That is why it is a little confusing that gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl praises edcucation in his state,

‘Massachusetts has consistently been at the top in the nation for K-12 education and we boast some of the best public and private colleges and universities in the world,”  

but then, in spite of this assessment on the state of education here, he says he wants to improve education by doing the very same things that the bottom 10 states in education standing do by banning non-existent critical race theory, referring to comprehensive sex education curriculum as pornographic, calling for “parental consent” on matters of transgender children, not necessarily their own children but other parents’ kids, and handing over control of education not to the trained and experienced experts, like teachers, but to parents whose main basis for evaluating education and curriculum is  personal, religious, and political beliefs with there being as many such beliefs as there are students in a school, but not best practices and proven methodologies with the understanding that schools teach every kid giving advantage to none.

Why stay at Number One when you can join the states with the worst standings on academic performance, safety, academic investment, class size, and attendance?

Diehl believes that former teachers, the experienced experts in education, should not sit on school committees because they may echo the sentiments of teachers unions whose members are teachers.

Diehl calls Rights, Respect, Responsibility, a sex education curriculum that seeks to address both the functional knowledge related to sexuality and the specific skills necessary to adopt healthy behaviors and reflects the tenets of social learning theory, social cognitive theory and the social ecological model of prevention, inappropriate for children.

And he supports the very unsafe policy of “parental consent” which would require schools to disclose to parents that a student has indicated they may be Transgender or have begun transitioning at school.

The model for his approach on education is Glenn Youngkin who became governor of Virginia because of his stance on CRT, parental control not only of curriculum but the speech of teachers, and the Transgender student menace because, as Diehl has said,

 “There’s parents’ groups out there that don’t feel like they’re being represented well, on either school boards or by state or local officials when it comes to their right to have to make their own healthcare decisions for them or their kids,”

Which, I guess, means that if your candidate for office doesn’t win, do whatever you can to screw up the system that the winner is now in.

Virginia has been in the top five states when it came to education, but that could change as, rather than continuing to do what has been successful, Youngkin will now be putting efforts into tilting at the windmills of CRT, sex education as pornography, and parents reporting teachers for saying something in class they do not agree with just as Diehl wants to do here.

This is not a failing Red State. It is a functioning Blue one with an education system Diehl himself praises.

Why would he want to sacrifice that on the altar of mindless unity with states that are not Massachusetts?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.