**updated**

“Mitt Romney is trying to out-right anyone else in the race.” – Rep. Jan Schakowsky

On a conference call earlier today put together by the DNC for the media, Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky called Mitt Romney the “most extreme candidate” on issues directly impacting women.

“Romney showed no leadership whatsoever” on Rush Limbaugh, which is true.

Born and raised in Missouri, I’m not at all surprised that Mitt Romney made his latest extreme statement on women in the Show Me state. Sen. Roy Blunt and Rush Limbaugh prove there is no shortage of war on women crusaders in there.

Rick Santorum swept the south last night, but Democrats have their eye on the math and the probable nomination of Mitt Romney, whatever tortured path it takes to get him there. So, as the GOP primary race turns to Illinois, Democrats are gearing up.

Mitt Romney has clarified his remarks in Missouri from yesterday, as usual, which were added to the discussion in Thursday’s Chicago-Sun Times [update], saying he meant he wanted to get rid of federal funding. Does Romney not know this would impact cancer screenings for women across the country or is it that he really doesn’t care about the less advantage who rely on Planned Parenthood?

“It’s not conservative, it’s extreme,” was Cecile Richards’ response. “It’s further to the right than conservative Republicans,” she continued, adding, “Planned Parenthood saves money.”

It’s not hard for someone like myself, who is adamant about full freedom for women, to be outraged by Mitt Romney and the Republican candidates joining the war on women. If women don’t control our bodies we simply aren’t free.

I’ve got major disagreement with what the Democratic Party has done on many fronts, finding Pres. Obama’s decision on Stupak dangerous and a way to embolden the right, which is exactly what happened. Scuttling Plan B was political and wrong on the science. However, his action on a contraceptive mandate is groundbreaking and one of the most important breakthroughs in women’s freedom and health, which also aids women economically.

I’m not a one-issue voter and neither are women, with economics the top issue for most of us, but Mitt Romney’s asking an awful lot if he expects a pass on these anti-women positions.

Romney supported the Blunt-Rubio amendment as well, calling Roe v. Wade “one of the darkest moments in Supreme Court history.”

“Women don’t come to Planned Parenthood to make a political statement,” Cecile Richards said on the call. I’m no fan of Ms. Richards, as she completely abdicated her responsibility during the Stupak Amendment debate, but she’s correct on this.

Romney also supports the offensive “personhood” amendment, which even Mississippi rejected, as they did Mitt Romney last night.

How can anyone support a political party or presidential candidate who supports what Romney says he does where women are concerned? It leaves many people with no choice at all, which is why it could be a very low turn out election.

I guess you can say he’ll just flip flop and go sane if he wins the presidency, but that’s an awfully big bet for people to make with their daughters and granddaughters futures.