.

Santorum Promises SC Primary Victory

The former Pennsylvania senator made two stops in the Upstate Sunday.

Surging GOP candidate Rick Santorum went before a crowd of at least 200 people at Chiefs Wings and Firewater on Congaree Road in Greenville on Sunday afternoon.

The former Pennsylvania senator, who came within an eyelash of winning the Iowa Caucuses, told the crowd that a lot of people have been asking him, despite that Iowa success, when they were going to get their win.

"Just wait until Jan. 21, and you'll find out where we're gonna get our win," Santorum said.

Santorum said he's devoted to running a positive campaign, but said that he's encouraged that he's "starting to make necessary contrasts" with the rest of the field. Former frontrunner Newt Gingrich, meanwhile, has vowed to go ugly if he has to to keep keep former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney from earning the nomination.

Santorum specifically said that there are "bigger issues facing this nation" than simply the economy, such as ensuring national security and reestablishing America's values.

Campaigning in the socially conservative Upstate, Santorum took the opportunity to once again clarify his stance on birth control.

"It's been clarified about oh, 150,000 times, so I'll clarify 150,001," Santorum said. "I've never said I wanted to ban birth control. I wouldn't vote for it. This is sort of the sad part that comes in, with folks who have an agenda aren't really interested in the truth."

But he said the Supreme Court should not have overturned local laws concerning birth control, and he said he is firmly against federal subsidies that provide contraception.

"The Supreme Court in a variety of different cases, Roe V. Wade being principal one most people know, has created rights in the constitution that don't exist, and has no basis."

Michael Fedor, a Santorum supporter from Greenville, agreed.

"I agree with that point of view that it should be a states' rights issue, rather than a federal government issue," he said.

Phil Manley of Anderson said it wasn't a huge issue, becuase he didn't see any state wanting to ban it.

"It's kind of like Mitt Romney (at NH debate) said. I don't think there are any states that want to ban contraceptives," he said. "For that reason, I don't really think the question was — it's like a made-up question.

"I don't think public funding for contraceptives is a good idea."

Former South Carolina congressman Gresham Barrett, the state chairman for the Santorum campaign. said Santorum's campaign is to "let the states deal with it."

"I will say this about Sen. Santorum; I don't care what anybody else may say, there's nobody up on that stage that is more pro-life than Rick Santorum," Barrett said.

Santorum's views on birth control have been complicated by campaigning with the Duggar family, an Arkansas family with 19 children who have been made famous through several reality TV shows. The Duggar family does not believe in birth control.

"I think his stand on birth control is obviously a personal thing, and he'd never impose it on anyone else," said Jill Duggar, 20, one of the family's children.

"As far as his stand on abortion, he believes life is there and he actually was the author of the ban on partial birth abortion that Bush signed into law."

Jinger Duggar, 18, said her family, which helped campaign for Santorum
in Iowa, would assist his campaign in South Carolina and Florida.

Jinger, Jill, Jessa and John Duggar were all at the event at Chiefs.

Later, at a scheduled stop at the Stax restaurant on Woodruff Road, Santorum painted a picture of what an Obama vs. Santorum general election matchup would look like.

Evoking David vs. Goliath imagery, Santorum said it would pit a "$1 billion machine" against "The guy out there going to town hall meetings, taking every question."

Amid a packed house at Stax, Santorum urged Upstate voters to coalesce the social conservative vote, and to "pull together."

"That's what your charge is," he said.

South Carolina, which has correctly predicted the GOP presidential candidate for the last 30 years, has become high stakes once again for the Republican field. Rick Perry, whose campaign is forging ahead after the Texas governor reassessed his campaign after a dismal performance in Iowa, was in Spartanburg at the Beacon to assert himself in the Palmetto State at the same time Santorum was in Greenville. 

Barrett said Santorum will return to New Hampshire for the primaries there and be in South Carolina by Jan. 11, staying there to criss-cross the state through the state's Jan. 21 primary. 

Joe January 09, 2012 at 12:07 AM
Absolutely correct, the Supreme Court exceeded its authority on ROE v Wade!
George Grace January 09, 2012 at 02:09 AM
Nonsense!
Wayne Middleton January 09, 2012 at 12:42 PM
Your estimate of attendance at the Chiefs restauraunt is grossly incorrect - at least twice the number was there. I was present and standing at the third level deep from his speaking position and counted 200 people and with that could easily see twice the number, maybe three times more - not including those eating meals and seated at tables in the restaurant.
Joe January 09, 2012 at 02:00 PM
geroge wgat nonsense,where in the constitution does it give a woman the :right: to kill her unborn child? Privacy? what about prostitution then? that should be legal, it's he body!
stanley seigler January 09, 2012 at 06:49 PM
@George Grace: "Nonsense!" indeed nonsense... "Roe v Wade is undoubtedly one of the Supreme Court's most controversial decisions. Handed down in January of 1973, the Court declared, by a vote of 7 to 2, that abortion was a right guaranteed by the Constitution under an implied right to privacy." the focus should be on education...not on the extreme positions...ie, neither a 100% ban nor over the counter abortion. educate those seeking abortions and parents. regulate clinics...maybe make abortions, available only, in full service hospitals...and; adequately fund/improve (not cut funding to) programs for disabled children...and provide support for the parents of these children. many opposed to legal abortions are also opposed to adequately funding programs for those brought into the world, without the luck of the sperm (those with disabilities), so do not have bootstraps with which to pull themselves up. making abortions illegal would have about the same effect that prohibition did in eliminating demon rum and that illegal prostitution has had in eliminating pimps and whores. perhaps TPers, right to lifers, should get real/practical ... "Criminalization of abortion did not reduce the numbers of women who sought abortions. In the years before Roe v. Wade, the estimates of illegal abortions ranged as high as 1.2 million per year. http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/history_abortion.html http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/roe30/beforeafter.html
Joe January 09, 2012 at 07:02 PM
People are dumb. The issue regarding Roe v. Wade is that the Supreme Court found somewhere in very fine print that abortion was legal due to privacy which is ridiculous! It was and is a dumb decision! Life begins at a certain point, we can all argue when, but when it does abortion HAS to be illegal after that point! Privacy or a woman's so called "right' is nowhere in the Constitution and anyone with 1/2 a brain knows better, they just want to hide behind progressive judges robes!
Andrew Moore (Editor) January 09, 2012 at 07:11 PM
Wayne - The attendance number reflects not everyone in the restaurant, but those there for the Santorum event. Obviously, there was some overlap between regular patrons and those only there for the rally, so that is why this is only an estimate. Campaign staffers provided me with an estimated "at least 200." At least, being the key word. Thanks for reading.
stanley seigler January 10, 2012 at 05:21 AM
FYI stuff of the 7 justices who voted for roe v wade...5 were appointed by GOP presidents...one voted against was appointed by JFK.
Joe January 10, 2012 at 12:28 PM
who cares who appointed who?
Donald Dugger February 17, 2012 at 05:22 PM
I think you should read the 4th amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." I think along with the 9th amendment that this is a reasonable case for a right to privacy. Seeing that one definition of "privacy" is: "The state of being free from intrusion or disturbance in one's private life or affairs: the right to privacy. " I would also suggest that implying that people that disagree with you are some how less intelligent is a poor argument.
stanley seigler February 17, 2012 at 06:31 PM
"I [DD] would also suggest that implying that people that disagree with you are some how less intelligent is a poor argument." COMMENT verrrry poor...unfortunately used by many who get their "facts" from limbo and his ilk...sadder yet/still is when their facts are combined with their prejudices; to form "true believer" opines...and; almost SOP on too many PATCH discussions.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something