The man's just not in the right party. Personally, I don't give a hoot about the abortion stance of a school Superintendent. It's just not all that relevent in that job.
Where did you get the idea that Bee supports "School to Work" and Goals 2000? I've not seen/heard that.
I, too, an four-square against vouchers. I do not support any program which would allow the state or federal government to further intrude upon the success of private schools. In order for private schools to qualify to accept vouchers, they're going to have to meet certain state-mandated requirements (curriculum, reporting, etc). It is the camel's nose under the tent and soon private schools will begin to resemble and demonstrate the same poor results as public schools.
I think Bee is right on this issue.
The man's just not in the right party. Personally, I don't give a hoot about the abortion stance of a school Superintendent. It's just not all that relevent in that job.
It is a good judge of character. In my opinion, no one who supports or tolerates the butchering of infants is fit for any public office and certainly the Republican Party should have nothing to do with them. I've personally committed to never vote for someone who accepts or supports the bloody sacrifice of children upon the altar of convenience - even if they're only running for streetsweeper. I will not knowingly support an evil person.
As for relevance to the position of State Superintendent of Schools - there is relevance. There may be some decisions about in-school health clinics, counseling, curriculum, sex education content, outside organizations (like Planned Parenthood) allowed to provide literature and in-school presentations, etc.