We can all read, and nothing you put there is evidence for the Dem accusations you posted that there will be “intimidation”, “coercion”, “register of pregnancies” or an “online Federal database of pregnant women”. The CDC’s function is to collect public health data and Dems don’t want it to talk about abortions gone wrong. If it’s wrong for the CDC to collect data, the Dems are deep in it, and that’s not the “pregnancy.gov” website your Dem narrative says is so sinister, that’s the CDC which they approve of if it’s COVID vaccination tracking but mysteriously disapprove of when it’s abortion mortality.

You repeatedly put up stuff that doesn’t say what you say it says, and that’s bad faith commenting as far as I’m concerned. I won’t hold it against you on a different topic, but I don’t trust you on this one.

Project 2025, and then to its Mandate for Leadership – under the Contents to Section 3, and then open #14 Department of Health and Human Services.

• Abortion and euthanasia are not health care.

• Data Collection. The CDC’s abortion surveillance and maternity mortality reporting systems are woefully inadequate.

• Because liberal states have now become sanctuaries for abortion tourism, HHS should use every available tool, including the cutting of funds, to ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother’s state of residence, and by what method.

• The Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 20239 would amend title XIX of the Social Security Act and Public Health Service Act to improve the CDC’s abortion reporting mechanisms by requiring states, as a condition of federal Medicaid payments for family planning services, to report streamlined variables in a timely manner.

• Abortion Pills. Abortion pills pose the single greatest threat to unborn children in a post-Roe world.

• Reverse its approval of chemical abortion drugs because the politicized approval process was illegal from the start.

• Mail-Order Abortions. Allowing mail-order abortions is a gift to the abortion industry that allows it to expand far beyond brick-and-mortar clinics and into pro-life states that are trying to protect women, girls, and unborn children from abortion.

It goes on and on about ways to “restrict abortions.” Here’s more:

• Prohibit abortion travel funding</b. Providing funding for abortions increases the number of abortions and violates the conscience and religious freedom rights of Americans who object to subsidizing the taking of life.

• Prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds. During the 2020–2021 reporting period, Planned Parenthood performed more than 383,000 abortions.
• Withdraw Medicaid funds for states that require abortion insurance or that discriminate in violation of the Weldon Amendment.

• Eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient.

That’s from September 29, 2024 at 7:31 am, which shows that the Republicans and Conservatives working at Project 2025, along with the many Republican and Conservative groups supporting Project 2025 support the Mandate. Notice 2nd point in the Mandate:

• Data Collection. The CDC’s abortion surveillance and maternity mortality reporting systems are woefully inadequate.

About a year later, the Republican leadership come up with a Bill to start collecting data (aka “Data Collection”).

The only thing you have proven here is that you will believe anything the REPs tell you to believe..

I already did and I’m not going to repeat them. The “#9 ESTABLISHMENT OF PREGNANCY.GOV” does not say to do what the Dems you uncritically quote accuse it of saying it does. It does mention a website, yes, and describes it as like the one at civilrights.justice.gov and thousands of others .gov, which no one is objecting to or accusing of anything sinister.

When someone accuses the GOP of an evil plan involving a website, a GOP source that merely describes the website does not prove or confess to the existence of the evil plan.

There’s just nothing there in what you’re trying to show us except Dem hallucinations. But yes, the GOP bill does call for the creation of a website where people can find out about resources for pregnancy. Everything else you accuse it of being for is just stuff Dems made up.

Don’t want to hear you claiming to “defend” me…Jeez!?! Disprove my points:

actual sources were best to use – Project 2025 > Mandate > MOMS Act > #9 ESTABLISHMENT OF PREGNANCY.GOV.

Or just continue believing the REP narrative on the subject…

You’re not psychic, and you don’t have access to my emotional state. I’m just sitting here drinking my coffee and looking at the blogs in the morning, my friend, and dispassionately challenging the narrative you’ve seized on today–just as I’m doing with three or four other narratives by three or four other people on three or four other blogs.

Plenty of times here I defend you to other people who accuse you of trolling, and I point out to them areas where they agree with you. (The only time I ever thought you were trolling was when you actually used the metaphor to describe what you were intending with your comment.)

I don’t dislike you, or other people commenting here, because I don’t have the illusion that I know anybody here. I dislike bogus narratives and bad-faith commenting. I rarely find you commenting in bad faith, but sometimes I think you have a bogus narrative, it’s true.

You’ve certainly made it clear you don’t like my style. I ain’t mad at ya. You don’t know me. On the Internet no one knows I’m a dog.

Read again – starting here:

Then saw this during search:

That was a near the starting point of my search, i.e., similar to the flyer.

You have ignored from there on…

Reread it again…

Any “anger” you think you detect in anything I wrote is entirely in your imagination. Yes, I was critical of you, but civilly so, and I’m not emotionally engaged in these exchanges (probably why you accuse me of “lecturing”). What follows will be the same, and there’s no anger behind it. I figure you’re not a snowflake and you can handle being politely challenged.

I wasn’t “regurgitating” anything.

You were and are. You quote something saying “Republicans will weaponize the whole of government to restrict a woman’s freedom to choose and force them to stay pregnant”, full of characteristic Leftist euphemisms. It’s not a Republican-leaning or an objective source, it’s a Leftist source. “freedom to choose” = euphemism for abortion. “force them to stay pregnant” = euphemism for abortion (there is no force needed for a pregnant woman to stay pregnant).

What your Dem source is calling “tracking” and “an online federal database” is an inflammatory description of the default behavior of pretty much any webpage that’s built these days. Every and any .gov page out there that uses cookies or where you enter a form–there are thousands–is doing exactly the same thing–as is this website. “Intimidate”, “coerce” and “register pregnancies” is simply made up by your Leftist source’s narrative.

For example https://civilrights.justice.gov/ has the same laundry list of things pregnancy.gov has: resources if you think your civil rights are violated, a form you’d enter in contact information if you want more help which would go into an “online database” where it’s “tracked”, and could be used to “intimidate”, “coerce”, and “register” labor troublemakers. But your Leftist source is trying to make it sound sinister and evil and only Republicans are making such a thing. That’s a crucial fact left out of the narrative you accepted and repeated here.

I checked the two what you called the “actual sources” and I did not find either to say they are going to track pregnant women or create a Federal database of pregnant women or register pregnancies. That is a creation of your Leftist narrative source, along with the inflammatory and made-up accusations of “intimidation”, “coercion”, and “registering pregnancies”.

All your “actual sources” say they will do is provide a website for people to get connected with resources if they wish, just like civilrights.justice.gov and the countless other .gov websites doing the very same thing. But because you accepted the Leftist narrative you believe the accusations.

In return, Adams’ men called Vice President Jefferson “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.”

and yet, the dems think they are taking the high road, even when they are not dems but have practiced entryism, and so, like larry hogan run