Republican super-delegate, national committeewoman and Bluffdale city councilwoman Nancy Lord was opposed to the new rule from its inception and remained dissatisfied following the vote.

"I think it's dishonest and disingenuous," Lord said. "They can sit there and pontificate about how this is the appropriate way to handle it, but I'm not buying it."

Lord said she believes she is beholden to the voters she represents and that the vast majority of those voters, 90 percent, cast votes for Romney.

"They can say we're bound to McCain," Lord said. "But I choose to honor the vote of the people and the will of the state. I had my mandate when people voted so overwhelmingly for Romney."

Lord said she needed some time to get over what happened at Saturday's meeting and would "have to think about" what she will do at the national convention.

James Evans, chairman of the party's constitution and bylaws committee, said the procedure used to obtain the clarifying language, in this case a standing rule, is clearly outlined in the constitution and was followed implicitly.

"Our constitution says that if something is not spelled out in our constitution or by-laws, we go to Robert's (Rules of Order,)" Evans said. "The governing body established that there was an ambiguity, and we followed, to the letter, what we are required to do to attain a clarification per our constitution."

Two scenarios could make the Utah GOP's embroglio a moot point. One is if four other states, in addition to Utah, were to commit the majority of their delegates to Romney, resulting in his name being placed on the ballot, or two, if McCain invites Romney onto the ticket as vice president.

---

E-mail: araymond@desnews.com