Mitt is right to embrace the GOP platform and the HLA while acknowleding it is a two-step process. While it may not be plausible in the near future, the country benefits from a president willing to use the bully pulpit to further the cause. If one doesn't even support the ultimate outcome -- the HLA -- how is that strongly pro-life? Pro-lifers are better served by a president willing to work towards the ultimate goal, regardless of whether or not it is attainable in the near future.
HLA doesn’t matter as much as credibility on these issues.
Just ask National Right to Life, they endorsed Fred (along with at least half a dozen state organizations).
And again, the President has NO constitutional role in amendment of the constitution. None.