The November Election – The Governor’s Race.

We know the position of the governor but the Republican candidate is an unknown… so lets look at his voting record and statement.

He has a problem with using your electric bill to fund assistance for low-income households and wants to remove that charge, but he hasn’t said what he would replace that funding with.

Abortions… mainly, he follows the national Republican position. According to CT Mirror, in 2022 Fazio voted no on Connecticut’s Reproductive Freedom Defense Act. That law expanded protections for abortion access and protected patients and providers from certain legal actions originating in states with restrictive abortion laws. Fazio has said he supports keeping abortion legal under Connecticut law, while also supporting the ability of states to set their own abortion laws, but he voted against expanding. CT protections.

Immigration… mainly, he follows the national Republican position. Fazio supports greater cooperation between Connecticut law enforcement and ICE and has opposed Connecticut laws that limit that cooperation. However, in this year’s session he voted against legislation that established schools, hospitals, courthouses, and places of worship as protected areas where ICE generally could not make an arrest without a judicial warrant.

Now for us… trans rights and healthcare.

First the good news he has publicly opposed homophobic/transphobic harassment and he vote for the bill consolidated the discrimination statutes. But that is where the “good news” ends. He mainly followed National on our rights. He opposes trans athletes. He playing our healthcare for young adults close to his vest, but why? Why does he not want to go on record, what is he afraid of?

And it is funny he is all for parent’s rights until it comes to our healthcare and then he thinks it is okay for government to step between us and our doctors.

So for Connecticut if you like Trump… you will probably like Fazio.

It's Spreading!

There are so many evil things have been spreading... in Turkey we are being violently rounded up!

Turkish police detain dozens in raids on gay bars and homes of LGBTQ+ activists

BBC News

Kieran Kelly

Sept. 13, 2026

Police in Turkey have detained 47 people in a series of raids on gay bars and the homes of LGBTQ+ activists, officials say.

Raids took place in 12 provinces over the weekend as part of a campaign dubbed "My Family is Safe" that the Turkish government says has been designed to protect family values.

One of the targets of the operation was LGBTQ+ association Kaos GL.

[...]

Officers detained 26 people and seized drugs, digital equipment, smuggled alcohol and a firearm during the raids, according to the Istanbul chief prosecutor's office.

In a separate statement, the Ankara chief prosecutor's office said another 21 people had been detained as part of an investigation into Kaos GL.

The organisation said 50 activists had been detained, more than 10 taken after police raids on their homes.

It said that authorities had blocked several websites and social media accounts linked to LGBTQ+ organisations.

This is scary! Al Jazeera reports;

Justice Minister Akin Gurlek said in a social media post on Sunday that prosecutors had launched an investigation into 162 suspects, nine associations and 13 businesses to “protect children, the institution of the family, and public order”.

Turkish authorities targeted current and former members of multiple LGBTQ rights and HIV awareness groups. The organisations’ websites were blocked days before the police raids.

Gurlek said the “My Family is Safe” operations on Sunday aligned with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s 10-year “Decade of Family and Population” executive order, which aims to combat Turkiye’s falling birthrate.

The scary part is I can foresee Trump doing something like because of Executive Orders.

“The real name of this operation is not ‘My Family is Safe’; it is state-led discrimination, politics of fear and the dismantling of civil society,” the Turkish Human Rights Association said on X.

The European Parliament’s rapporteur on Turkiye, Nacho Sanchez Amor, condemned the detentions as “a shocking escalation in the repression” in the country.

Last September in a National Security Memorandums and Executive Orders it directed federal law enforcement to target political violence, explicitly framing "extremism on gender" and support for progressive social causes alongside phrases branding opponents as "domestic terrorists" So it makes you wonder if Trump would do something like this?

Snopes

I think one of the standards on the internet is "Snopes," I trust them. So when I saw that they looked at the report from the White House, my ears perked up.

HHS report cites inaccurate data to claim more than 5,500 trans minors received 'sex change surgeries'

Research from Harvard found that gender-affirming surgeries for minors are rare — and usually involve chest reduction for cisgender boys.

Rae Deng

Sept. 4, 2026

As cited by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a database from anti-trans group Do No Harm proves that from 2019 to 2023, more than 5,500 minors in the United States had sex change surgeries.

An August 2026 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report claimed that "watchdog analyses tracking" had determined more than 5,500 minors had undergone "sex change surgeries" from 2019 to 2023. 

The "watchdog analyses tracking" references an anti-LGBTQ+ group that inflated the data by counting a vast number of procedures entirely unrelated to "sex change surgeries," including hair removal, surgical removal of excess eyelid skin and bladder drainage. These procedures were counted in the "sex change surgery" statistic as long as the patient had a gender dysphoria diagnosis or a psychiatric condition related to crossdressing (which is different from being trans). As with any other person's healthcare, there are many reasons why a trans person may need these procedures that have nothing to do with being trans. 

Credible data indicates that gender-affirming surgeries are rarely performed on minors, and most minors who receive them are not actually trans, but cisgender boys getting chest reductions. A peer-reviewed study from Harvard University researchers in 2024 determined that in 2019, only 85 trans minors received gender-affirming surgery and most of them were age 15 to 17. The Harvard study found no gender-affirming surgeries conducted on children under 12. 

Surprise, surprise... they lied!  

And this is what they say about the doctors...

A child who undergoes a sex rejecting procedure can become a patient for life.

A disturbing new Trump administration report details the financial incentives that HHS says pushed clinics to take advantage of some of the country’s most vulnerable children.

“There was a tremendous financial incentive for these clinics and these practitioners to produce what we call captive patients.”

And their conclusion:

The bottom line 

The data HHS cited in its report comes from an anti-LGBTQ+ group that used faulty analysis to inflate data on gender-affirming surgeries among trans minors. 

It's more accurate to say that from 2019 to 2023, more than 5,500 minors, many of whom had a gender dysphoria diagnosis at one point in time, received various procedures for any number of medical reasons, the vast majority of which were unrelated to being trans. 

Peer-reviewed research suggests that gender-affirming surgeries among minors are incredibly rare and usually involve cisgender boys undergoing chest reductions.

The report is a good example of the saying "If you can t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull."

KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) reports on the harm Trump vendetta on the trans community...

HHS Report: “Wolves in White Coats: How Doctors and Hospitals Pushed and Profited from the Fraud of “Gender Medicine,” August 12, 2026.

Purpose: Much of the report focuses on what HHS calls “fraudulent billing practices” relating to gender-affirming care.. Through various tables HHS identifies over 100 providers it believes have questionable billing claims related to gender-affirming care. Beyond the concerns it raises about billing the report content is wide ranging. It states gender-affirming care providers may offer this care as a way to generate revenue, that they do so to create a “captive patient” audience, describes Biden administration civil rights actions as efforts “to impose, unilaterally, gender ideology,” criticizes medical associations supportive of and/or providing guidance around gender affirming care, and promotes the stories of people who have detransitioned and parents who opposed access to gender-affirming care.

Implications: The billing and coding data provided in the report has already been used to support other administration actions. It is the basis of a letter HHS Sec. Kennedy sent to the OIG seeking investigations of providers (see separate entry).

The report fosters misinformation in several domains. It is unlikely that providers are offering gender affirming care for the purposes of generating revenue given the small share of transgender people in the U.S. and relatively low cost of interventions (as described in the report). The report also appears to conflate the cost of medications with revenue generated by prescribers. It suggests the Biden administration’s efforts to improve civil rights protections for LGBTQ people promoted gender affirming care. It uses select sketches of individuals who have detransitioned to promote the notion that “activists and providers have tried to force children to undergo potentially life-altering interventions” when in fact detransitioning is quite rare.

The report could be used to build a basis for further administration actions aimed at limiting gender affirming care and may also serve to intimidate named providers.

HHS Report: “Where the Clinic Meets the Movement: Does Gender Ideology Arm Left-Wing Authoritarian Psychology?”, August 2026.

Purpose: HHS issued this commissioned report with the stated aim of “examining the psychology behind strong support for radical gender ideology and left-wing authoritarianism.” It finds “gender ideology may function as an ideological accelerant” and leads to legitimizing violence.

Implications: This HHS commissioned report seeks to align support for transgender people generally, that is beyond support for access to medical care, with “left-wing authoritarianism” and potentially violence. Despite this aim, the report states that “violence connected to gender ideology remains largely undocumented in the academic literature.”

The survey includes use of a new tool to measure support for transgender people asking questions drawn from guidance from major medical associations. There is no mention in the report of this scale being validated. The questions sought to measure the endorsement of consensus positions not related to gender-affirming medical care. Questions generally focused on beliefs around support for transgender people’s gender identities and gender exploration. The study found that people who scored higher on this measure (i.e., those who are more likely to agree with the guidance) were also more likely to hold “racialized” “authoritarian” left-wing views, and more likely to say political violence could be justified in certain cases.

Efforts to challenge major medical association guidance may represent an aim to erode public support for these organizations and align with other actions (see above) seeking to harm the credibility of these organizations. Further, the report could be used as a basis for the administration’s continued efforts to target these organizations and/or erode support for transgender people and their access to care. The report may also align with other efforts by the administration to suggesting there is a relationship between supporting transgender people and violence.

The instrument developed does not appear to be a probability survey raising questions about representativeness of the report’s findings. The report suggests that correlated findings are casual, which is not supported by the analysis, and it does not appear to have been peer reviewed.

This is all part of an effort by the Trump administration to deny proper medical treatment to a minority for political gain.

The Trump Administration Launches a New Angle of Attack Against Trans Healthcare

Federal officials referred around 150 healthcare organizations for investigation into allegations of fraud.

Mother Jones

Madison Pauly

August 18, 2026

Just two days after finalizing a regulation to make sure trans kids from low-income families can’t afford puberty blockers or hormone therapy, the Trump administration has loosed another salvo in its bitter war against transgender people’s healthcare. On Thursday, the Department of Health and Human Services published a report—authored largely by employees of right-wing advocacy groups—alleging that some hospitals are using incorrect codes to bill insurance for pediatric gender-affirming care. The report paints transgender healthcare as motivated by profit rather than medical necessity, calling the billing codes “potentially fraudulent.”

In a social media video, Vice President JD Vance announced he was referring roughly 150 healthcare organizations listed in the report to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation. The list includes over a dozen major children’s hospitals, pharmacies including Walgreens, and small doctors offices and clinics. Standing at Vance’s side, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. added that he, too, was referring the providers for investigation by his department’s inspector general.

They also call the report a hatch job!

Yet advocates of transgender healthcare describe the HHS report released Thursday as part of a larger effort to shut down care. “This report is part of a broader pattern from this administration: Using the power of government to attack science and target health care providers instead of helping families get the care they need,” says Kellan Baker, senior advisor for health policy at the Movement Advancement Project. “It’s an intimidation campaign,” adds Jennifer Levi, the director of transgender and queer rights at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, pointing to ways the report might show up in future legal cases.

This all is to justify Trump's pogrom on the trans community!

Allegiance

That is Trump's mind set... I appointed you so you owe your allegiance to me and not the Constitution!

Trump slams the Supreme Court for rejecting his push to restrict mail ballots

AP News

By  SEUNG MIN KIM

Sept. 15, 2026

President Donald Trump on Tuesday went after the Supreme Court after it rejected his push to restrict mail-in voting in this year’s midterms, saying justices who opposed him were “not the people I interviewed.”

[...]

“The Court’s inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for our Country will go down, in a very negative way, in the annals of History,” Trump wrote in a lengthy social media post Tuesday. “This Supreme Court is bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left into making decisions that have set America back at least a hundred years.”

[...]

“These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves,” Trump said. He asserted that the court “is costing the United States Trillions of Dollars with shockingly bad rulings that are of such magnitude that it won’t be easily possible for our Country to recover or heal.”

Trump went on to say...

“It is not easy for me to write this criticism of the United States Supreme Court - it will likely cost me dearly for years to come - but I feel it my obligation and duty, as President, to do so for the America we love!” Trump said.

Trump doesn't even calculate the Constitution and the laws... it is all about loyalty to him.  

This Is Just The Type Of Person The Republicans Are Looking For!

Accused of domestic violence. ✓
Questions about whether he lied on his jury questionnaire. ✓
Ignores facts. ✓

 

CBS News reported that...

 CBS News legal analyst Caroline Polisi said the real issue here is whether the juror lied when filling out the juror questionnaire.

 

 "The test is whether he made purposeful misrepresentations during the jury selection process. If he did, that's a crime," she said, adding that "an arrest is not an automatic disqualification for serving on a jury." 

The juror court questionnaires are sealed as part of the official court record.

"It's unlikely we will find out whether the juror made misrepresentations unless there is an official court-sanctioned inquiry," Polisi said. 

If the juror did lie on the form, they could be charged with perjury or making false statements to the court.

But that is the backstory... what I want to write about is the offer Florida made to the juror.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis Offers ‘Asylum’ to Holdout Juror in Lindsay Clancy Case
“If the juror is being harassed, Florida will provide asylum,” DeSantis wrote on social media
People

By Charlotte Phillipp
September 13, 2026

 

 

 NEED TO KNOW

•     Governor Ron DeSantis criticized media coverage of the holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial and offered him “asylum” in Florida
•     The juror reportedly has a history of domestic violence allegations and an active restraining order against him, according to a Sept. 11 report from NBC10 Boston
•     Clancy’s trial ended in a mistrial after jurors tasked with determining criminal responsibility in the deaths of her three young children couldn’t reach a unanimous verdict

 Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is offering “asylum” to the holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial after accusing media outlets of launching a smear campaign against him.

On Friday, Sept. 11, DeSantis, 47, shared a post on X in response to a recent report from NBC10 Boston that the juror has a history of alleged domestic violence and an active restraining order against him.

“A man objected to allowing a woman to kill her three young kids and get away with it, so NBC is trying to smear that juror, whose identity should be protected. Another low for legacy media,” the governor wrote. “If the juror is being harassed, Florida will provide asylum — I’m sure he’d be welcomed and appreciated.”

That is total BS! That is a total lie! The jury was hung. It was split 11 to 1 in favor of finding Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility (insanity) due to postpartum psychosis. She would have a hearing for involuntary commitment, and then, depending upon the outcome, she could have an initial hospital commitment that can last up to six months. After that, the facility can request successive one-year extensions.

To me, this isn't really about Lindsay Clancy. It's about the governor of Florida using a Massachusetts criminal case as a political weapon against a Democratic state. The New York Post reported that,

NBC10 Boston reported that the juror was accused of attacking his wife in September 2021 and that last year his nephew had taken out a restraining order against him. The man also faces a pending eviction case by his landlord for $12,000 of unpaid rent, the outlet reported.

Court records show that the juror divorced his wife after the alleged incident in 2021 and that the criminal charge against him was dismissed — although his ex-wife said she backed away from pursuing the case because she was worried that testifying could cause her to lose custody of her daughter, the outlet reported.

 

 Juror questionnaires in Massachusetts ask prospective jurors whether they have been arrested, charged with a crime, or been served with a court order — all which should have been answered affirmatively by the holdout juror, NBC10 reported.

That is the person he wants to give asylum to: a nice, fine, upstanding individual. But the real reason he wants to offer it is to take a political dig at a Democratic state. He doesn't care one iota about the case, just that he thinks he can get votes over this! He is playing to the MAGA crowd.

However, what is even more outrageous is what the Hindustan Times is reporting...

Lindsay Clancy holdout juror GiveSendGo raises whopping $110,700 as Ron DeSantis offers him ‘asylum’
A GiveSendGo launched for a male holdout juror who reportedly led to a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy case has already raised $110,700.
Sep 14, 2026

By Sumanti Sen

 

 

 A GiveSendGo launched for a male holdout juror who reportedly led to a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy case had raised $110,700 at the time of writing this article. The GiveSendGo, which aims to raise $150,000, describes how “one juror held his seat” when support poured in for Lindsay.

 

[...]

 

 “The country got the full TikTok-diagnostics package. Postpartum. Psychosis. Voices. Trauma. A stack of pill bottles and a sad playlist. The SSRI-medicated mob ran cover like this was a self-care story instead of a triple child killing. They wanted a diagnosis, not a verdict. They wanted her sick, not guilty. They wanted three dead kids memory-holed so nobody had to say the words mother and murderer in the same sentence,” the fundraiser says.

 The legal question was whether she was criminally responsible because of her mental state, and one juror disagreed with the other eleven. DeSantis chose to portray that juror as a heroic man standing up against people supposedly trying to excuse the killing of three children.

 

While the conservatives are making him out as some kind of male hero! They have turned the focus from perjury to sexism. OK Magazine wrote:

Joe Rogan Slams Supporters of Lindsay Clancy, Says They Wouldn't Rally If a Father 
Faced the Same Trial: 'This Lady Killed Her Kids'

Lesley Abravanel
Sept. 3 2026

 

 

 Podcaster Joe Rogan slammed public advocates and social media users supporting Lindsay Clancy, pointing to a double standard between men and women.

Rogan argued that the public sympathy surrounding the case highlights a societal bias. He claimed, "This lady killed her kids, and everyone's like, 'Oh my God, she needed help.' Imagine if a single father killed his kids.”

He asserted that a father facing identical charges would never receive a "Free Lindsay"-style campaign or solidarity rallies.

Totally illogical!

He slammed the wave of people creating dedicated support groups and spreading online conspiracy theories to defend her actions. He described the phenomenon as proof that "people are out of their f------ minds right now.”

"If those ladies could see the crime scene and see those dead kids with their f------ vacant eyes staring up because their mother took their life, the last f------ thing that they saw was their mother standing over them, choking them to death, I don't think they would feel so bad,” he said.

This is what MAGA thinks now... toxic masculinity! And it is so easy to get them riled up. So the guy who lied on a jury form is now a hero!

A Little Trans History

Us old-timers groan when we hear that because it was a gatekeeper.

You had to fit into their standards... it wasn’t so much for the medical requirements, but rather your sexual orientation and how well you could assimilate into society. Trans women had to be sexually attracted to men, and, well, trans men didn’t exist. The guys were written off as just lesbians. 

If you talk to someone from that time or read something from it, you will find out that we had a reputation for being liars according to the doctors. We would say we were attracted to men, but we dated women.

Eventually, they changed the rules to drop the sexual orientation and assimilation requirements (though many other roadblocks to transition still remain). Around that time, conservatives started using us as scapegoats... as a diversion from the real issues.

The golden years were from around the turn of the century until Trump got elected to his first term; then, the pendulum didn't just swing to the right, it was slammed over to the right.

I remember the Lavender Scare. 

I remember "Save our Children." 

But this is different. This is an organized, government-led attack on a minority. We haven't seen this since the 1930s. We have seen this throughout history: when one group begins gaining social acceptance, conservatives get energized and try to put them "in their place!" But they don't stop us... they only slow us down. And we shall prevail!

What A Can Of Worms!

So, in my news feed this morning was a story about a California trans court case... it is both good news and a great big unknown. In case you haven't heard, we had a victory... of sorts.

Lawyers and Settlements reports:

California Wins Transgender Athletes Lawsuit

A federal judge has ruled that California can continue allowing transgender girls to compete in girls’ school sports, despite a recent Supreme Court decision allowing other states to ban them.

September 8, 2026,

By Jane Mundy

The legal battle over transgender athletes has produced an unusual result: states may ban transgender girls from girls’ sports, but they don’t have to.

Federal Judge Cynthia Valenzuela August 31st dismissed a U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit challenging California policies that allow transgender students to compete on school sports teams consistent with their gender identity.

[...]

In its June 30 decision, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that West Virginia and Idaho could restrict participation on girls’ teams based on biological sex. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that states “may maintain women’s and girls’ sports for biological females” and may determine eligibility based on biological sex.

But “may” turned out to be an important word. The Supreme Court did not rule that every state must adopt those restrictions. Nor did it decide the separate question of whether Title IX permits transgender girls to participate on girls’ and women’s teams.

Valenzuela concluded that nothing in Title IX clearly required California to exclude transgender girls. She found California had not received clear notice that billions of dollars in federal education funding were contingent on banning transgender girls from girls’ sports. The federal government’s guidance on the issue has also shifted repeatedly over the past decade.

What happens when a trans-friendly state plays a non-trans-friendly state?

Education Week reported that;

Therefore, Valenzuela wrote that California “lacked clear notice” of such categorical exclusion of transgender athletes as a condition of the federal funding California received, and other court decisions—including the Supreme Court’s in June—did not “supply the missing clarity.”

It seems like each state is on its own. If "states' rights" hold up in court, it will be very interesting to see what happens. What will happen, say, in the Rose Bowl if one team bans trans athletes, or if a team with trans athletes plays in a state that bans them? Will they have to forfeit?