With 84% of precincts reporting, Governor Mitt Romney managed to eke out a victory in Maine. It is the second victory of the day for him, coming off a win in the CPAC Straw Poll. No delegates will be awarded tonight (that doesn't happen until May), but it still must be a welcome end to a rough week for the campaign.

Romney thanked voters in a press release saying, "I thank the voters of Maine for their support. I’m committed to turning around America. And I’m heartened to have the support of so many good people in this great state."

Ron Paul finished in a close second, with 36% of the vote to Romney's 39%. Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, neither of whom campaigned in Maine, received third and fourth place with 18% and 6%, respectively.

Last time Sarah Palin was in Washington D.C. she was riding on the back of a Harley Davidson motorcycle with the Rolling Thunder. Saturday evening, Palin addressed thousands of CPAC attendants to close out a busy weekend jam packed full of conservative ideas. She was welcomed to the stage by a standing crowd of activists and raucous applause.

"To me the conservative movement has never been stronger or smarter,” Palin said. “We’ve been waving a bold banner that shouts ‘Don’t Tread on Me.’”

Although she touched on topics ranging from energy policy, the economy, unemployment, foreign policy, pro-life issues, troops overseas and the GOP presidential primary race, she kept the focus on President Obama’s failures during his time in Washington D.C. She pointed out that during his State of the Union Address, Obama hardly mentioned unemployment or out of control entitlement spending.

“We want your administration to end,” she said. “We believe real recovery can’t get underway until government gets out of the way.”

Palin said Obama has a skewed view of America as a politician from Chicago now tucked away in Washington, scratching the backs of his friends through “capitalism of connections” while Americans outside of the beltway suffer. Congressmen become “plutocrats,” she said, adding that they don’t just benefit off the of the government themselves, but spread the wealth around to their friends too. Palin charged that crony capitalism is at the root of American’s economic problems.

“This [Washington D.C.] is the playground for the government rich and they’re hoping that you work really really hard to keep her going.” She said. “Life around here is really good materially, our permanent political class is content. They are immune from the realities the rest of us face.”

She painted Washington D.C. as a wetland, rather than a swamp, and said it’s time to drain the corruption in order to regain a strong American economy, making it clear government spending will not create jobs.

“They [government] don’t mine, they don’t drill, they don’t harvest, they produce nothing,” she said. “The President wants to raise taxes so he can redistribute wealth. We want to cut taxes to create more wealth.”

She credited the tea party for being outside of the status quo in Washington and praised them for be being willing go to Congress and fight for small government ideas.

“This government isn’t too big too fail, it’s too big to succeed,” she said. “We can’t wait, we must come together as constitutional conservatives to save our Republic.”

Palin commented briefly on the 2012 GOP race for the White House, encouraging healthy competition and a long primary, stating Republicans should avoid eating their own in the process.

“We must stand united, whoever our nominee is,” she said. “We believe that it’s time to return power to the people, that’s where the Founders intended it.”

The room was packed, the applause was loud and she repeatedly brought people to their feet.

In case you missed it, here is our interview with Palin from CPAC.

Some good news for Team Romney tonight-after losing three primaries in one night, he is the winner of this year's CPAC Straw Poll. 3,408 votes were cast in total. The full results are:

Mitt Romney -- 38%

Rick Santorum -- 31%

Newt Gingrich -- 15%

Ron Paul -- 12%

On Thursday afternoon, I caught up with Hollywood actor Kirk Cameron at CPAC to discuss his upcoming documentary film -- Monumental: In Search of America’s National Treasure -- which will hit select theatres for a one-night screening on March 27, 2012. As a former atheist, Cameron also discussed the importance of faith in his daily life, as well as the many challenges he faces as a Christian working in Hollywood. Check it out below:

Townhall caught up with Sarah Palin at CPAC 2012 this afternoon for a short interview. Palin is set to take the stage Saturday evening to round out the busy weekend in Washington D.C.

Lawmakers agreed back in December, after much bickering, on a two-month extension, but that runs out at the end of this month. Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday that Congress "needs to stop this middle-class tax hike from happening. Period. No drama. No delay."

Lawmakers have made halting progress on legislation to extend the tax cut. The bill also would renew jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed and prevent doctors from being whacked by a 27 percent cut in their Medicare payments, but the package costs $150 billion-plus and lawmakers will have to find a way to pay for it.

Democrats insisted on a two-month bill in December when House Republicans were pushing for a yearlong deal. Despite the insanity of a mere two-month extension, and against the wishes of payroll industry insiders, Democrats got their wish.

Policy analys Charles Blahous of the Hoover Institution notes the long list of "temporary" policies, and writes that the U.S. would do well to either enact them permanently or do away with them.

If the two sides could gloss over their long-term policy differences just long enough to agree to do away with the array of pseudo-temporary policies, both would benefit enormously. It would also become far easier for the two sides to negotiate adjustments to current policies going forward than it is in the current environment. The next president, whoever he is, could improve our fiscal practices enormously simply by leading a frontal, bipartisan assault on the various “temporary” tax and spending polices of the federal government.

The payroll tax fight is one entirely of Democrats' doing. They welcome anything where they can "agree" on tax cuts while shamelessly politicking and demagoguing the Republicans. President Obama and Congress would do well to do away with "temporary" policies and remove the uncertainty.

"Insurance is for catastrophes not an oil change."

ObamaCollegeGate on the way? Yesterday during his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Andrew Breitbart gave the audience and C-SPAN viewers a preview of what's to come during the 2012 general election against Barack Obama. He said the mainstream media refused to vet Obama in 2008 and that he will not go unvetted in 2012. Breitbart says he has videos of Obama in college that nobody has seen. Considering he's the man who took down ACORN and Anthony Weiner, this could be good.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a press conference Thursday that Republicans are using religious freedom as an excuse to change the law in a way that will be harmful to women's health. This was in regard to the pushback against Catholic employees being required to cover birth control and abortifacients, which violates Church doctrine.

“And so this is an issue, 98 percent of Catholics, they tell us, use contraception, overwhelming numbers of people in our country support the president’s decision, including, they tell us, at least you all tell us, a majority of Catholics,” said Pelosi.  “So I support it.  If it comes to the floor we’ll use this as a welcome debate to talk about the importance of women’s health.”

“And it’s not just about the women,” Pelosi said.  “It’s about their children and the health of their families as they make serious decisions and use contraception to determine, as I said, the size and timing of their families.  That will be a debate that we welcome.”

“It’s a sad one,” she concluded.  “We shouldn’t have to be to a place where people are saying—when the overwhelming practice is going in favor of women’s health—‘we want to pull that back.’  And use the excuse of religious freedom, which, of course, this is not.”

If the government has the opportunity to give more freebies to people, then sure, why not, right? Pelosi seems to think that because she desires a particular outcome, there is no reason that the government shouldn't provide it (or force others to). I'm pretty sure that no one in America who wants contraception has had trouble getting it, and yet the above statement makes it sound like birth control is impossible to obtain on ones own. There's a difference between being left alone to obtain whatever goods and services a person desires and being given everything as though we are all incapable of finding things that we want or need without help from the government. Creating new rights (like a right to birth control) will of course trample on someone else's right to be left alone. Fortunately in this country we have a First Amendment to protect our original rights, as Senator Mitch McConnell pointed out.

“Our founders believed so strongly that the government should neither establish a religion, nor prevent its free exercise that they listed it as the very first item in the Bill of Rights,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in response to the Democrats’ actions. “And Republicans are trying today to reaffirm that basic right. But Democrats won’t allow it. They won’t allow those of us who were sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution to even offer an amendment that says we believe in our First Amendment right to religious freedom. .... I’ve spent a lot of time in my life defending the First Amendment. But I never thought I’d see the day when the elected representatives of the people of this country would be blocked by a majority party in Congress to even express their support for it.”

Reporter Randy Economy reveals the existence of criminal allegations against LA County Assessor John Noguez to reduce the commercial property taxes of clients of longtime campaign contributor Encino businessman Ramin Salari. 

Assessor Noguez, who lacks a college degree, was elected in 2010 to manage the $1 Trillion LA Assessors office with strong political backing and support of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and California Assembly member Gil Cedillo.  Villaraigosa and Cedillo supported Noguez even when confronted with facts about Noguez connections to one of the City of Bell’s indicted officials, ex Bell Councilman George Cole and other felons Noguez associates with.  Cole is presently under criminal indictment for his activities in the now famous City of Bell scandal.  Cole claims to be innocent.   Noguez was also the part time mayor of the the small City of Huntington Park which is adjacent to Bell.  Noguez strongly supported George Coles Steelworkers Old Timers Association with contracts from Huntington Park.  Coles political activities have now become legendary in Southeast Los Angeles.

Noguez is associated with many other colorful characters in Southeast Los Angeles.  A catalog of these associations has been kept by a secret activist who goes by the name “The Editor of Watch Our City.”  A link to articles of Noguez’s association with felons and colorful folks can be found at this link.  “The Editor” also highlights additional rumors of payback for Noguez political contributors in story’s on his website.

Below is Randy Economy’s unedited article, reprinted with permission.  The LA Times is digging into this as well I can confirm.

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has opened up a formal inquiry into the activities of Assessor John R. Noguez, Los Cerritos Community News has learned exclusively.

Noguez, who was elected in November of 2010 is the subject of a probe that was launched on November 18, 2011, LCCN can confirm.  In an interview with David Demerjian, Senior District Attorney with the Office of Public Integrity on Monday, a complaint was filed late last year and that “an inquiry has been commenced.”  LCCN (Los Cerritos Community News) has also been told by four senior members who work at the highest levels for Noguez that that the focus of the probe revolves around the relationship between Noguez and Encino businessman Ramin Salari.

Salari is the owner of Assessment Appeals Services, LLP. According to their company website, Salari touts his company’s ability to help “over 6,000 property tax reassessments with a high success rate.”  Noguez spokesman Louis Reyes said that “they have not received anything whatsoever from the District Attorney’s Office.”  “You are asking us to comment on something we don’t have any knowledge about,” Reyes said. On Wednesday, Reyes called LCCN and said that Noguez had been told by Demerjian that “the Assessor was not the subject of the inquiry.”

On Thursday at 9 a.m. after the story broke on both the LCCN website and confirmed in the Los Angeles Times by Pulitzer Prize winner journalist Ruben Vives, Demerjian called LCCN Publisher Brian Hews and Reporter Randy Economy and denied ever having a “conversation with the Assessor” about the probe. Further Demerjian said that he has only met Noguez on a “couple of occasions” at social events. “I have never spoken to the man,” Demerjian said.

LCCN has been told that the investigation centers on the influence that Salari has been able to “leverage” on behalf of his private clientele with his longtime political ally Noguez. Salari has helped bankroll campaigns for Noguez going back to his days as an elected member of the Huntington Park City Council. LCCN has also been told that Salari has personally attended “numerous” meetings with at least three “senior level” members of Noguez inner circle to “assert pressure” on professional county appraisers to directly “devalue” assessed property rates on behalf Salari clients at Assessment Appeal’s Services, LLP. 

Several sources inside the Assessor’s office tell LCCN that Noguez staff members Andrew Stevens, Assistant Assessor Eric Haagenson and Chief Appraiser to Major Real Properties Mark McNeil have been with Salari in “heated” meetings with lower level appraisers in order to have commercial properties “devalued” at the “direction of Noguez.” The meetings took place in the Assessor’s North County Offices located in Encino and in West Los Angeles.  In one of those meetings, LCCN has been told that Stevens berated a lower level appraiser in a “heated confrontation” and directed the staff member to “do as he was told” with Salari’s “standing right next to him in the meeting.”  One high ranking assessor who has worked for the county for more than three decades, who spoke on condition of anonymity said that as many as 171 properties are involved in the probe, with more than “one billion dollars” in property devaluations involved. “This is Bell on steroids,” the source told LCCN.  “This is a classic case of interference of government officials to reduce the valuation of someone’s property that has direct political ties to an elected assessor,” said one senior ranking county appraiser.

Noguez has been with the Assessor’s office for the past 25 years, and was elected to the top position in 2010. He is responsible for locating all taxable property in the sprawling county and to identify who the true legal owners are of each property.  Salari is considered to be a key part of Noguez inner political circle dating back to his days when the first term Assessor served as an elected member of the Huntington Park City Council. Salari has been a major contributor to past Noguez political efforts.  In 2003 Salari donated more than $15,000 in printing to Noguez and two other allies during a HP City Council campaign, according to records obtained by LCCN.   --Randy Economy, Reporter (Copyright. Los Cerritos Community News. Hews Media Group. 2012)

This post was written by Gwilym McGrew.

PPP is teasing new numbers showing Santorum pulling ahead of Romney nationally in the primary, but this poll will get even more attention:
 

In a potential Election 2012 matchup, the president attracts 50% of the vote and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney 40%. This is the largest lead the president has enjoyed against Romney in regular polling going back more than a year. It’s also the first time that the president has reached the 50% level of support against Romney.

Rick Santorum now trails the president by four percentage points, 46% to 42%. Rasmussen Reports will now be tracking the Obama-Santorum race on a daily basis. Matchup results are updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Last week, Santorum had a one-point advantage over Obama. However, like Rick Perry, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich before him, Santorum was unable to sustain that advantage beyond a single poll. In the crucial swing state of Ohio, Santorum is now even with the president. Romney trails by four.

The Santorum surge is for real, which isn't great news for Romney.  Then again, this process is cyclical.  The White House will say they're thrilled by this outcome, but there's danger here, too.  With his approval rating ascendant at the moment -- thanks in part to the U3 pop -- the incumbent still only pulls 46 percent against his closest Republican competitor.  Once Republicans stop knifing eacthother during this bloody primary, the unity process will begin, and Obama's negative coverage holiday will end.  Until that time, it'll be a rumble for the nomination -- with Obama as the beneficiary.  That dynamic is nothing new.  Santorum made the case for himself at CPAC this morning, delivering pointed attacks on the president and Mitt Romney flanked by his family (via Greg's post below):
 

Romney spoke a few hours later, underlining his conservative bona fides -- such as they exist -- and savaging the current president's "ineptitude and failure."  The main message of Romney's speech today was pretty savvy.  As I've written previously, he cannot credibly attack Santorum from the Right on many policy issues, and process arguments (electability, etc) are difficult to make, especially in light of today's polling.  The former governor's best tactic against Santorum is to emphasize the importance executive leadership, a theme he discussed at length today:
 

I spent 25 years in business, starting at the bottom and going on to help create a great American success story. I led an Olympics out of the shadows of scandal and turned around a state crying out for leadership.  In each of these endeavors, I worked with many talented people, but I was the Chief Executive. Success or failure lay on my shoulders. When tough decisions had to be made, I made them. Leadership as a Chief Executive isn’t about getting a bill out of subcommittee or giving a speech – it’s about setting clear goals and overcoming constant adversity. It’s about sharing credit when times are good and taking responsibility for failure.

I am the only candidate in this race, Republican or Democrat, who has never worked a day in Washington. I don’t have old scores to settle or decades of cloakroom deals to defend.  As conservatives, you’ve learned to be skeptical of this city and its politicians and right you are. My wife and I raised five boys and one of the lessons you learn is that when you hear an excuse that just doesn’t make sense… it’s because it doesn’t make sense. And let me tell you, any politician who tries to convince you that they hated Washington so much that they just couldn’t leave, well, that’s the same politician who will try to sell you a Bridge to Nowhere.

That last sentence is a clear shot across Santorum's bow.  Romney might practice what he preaches on "taking responsibility for failure" by specifically explaining what elements of Romneycare "didn't work" -- a point he often glosses over.  As of this writing, Newt Gingrich is addressing CPAC, delivering a variation the stump speech he's been using since Florida.   One noticeable change: Zero attacks on his Republican competitors.  Hmm.  Reverting to nice Newt, or seeing the writing on the wall?  Ron Paul is not attending CPAC this year.

During his CPAC speech this afternoon, Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association Wayne LaPierre made clear that a second term for President Obama means a full blown attack on the Second Amendment. He also warned the NRA will do whatever it takes to prevent his reelection.
 

“The media won’t win this election, gun owners will,” LaPierre said.
“Gun owners and Americans who care about our great freedom are stepping up and supporting our cause.”


LaPierre pointed out that a second Obama term means the possibility of three new Supreme Court Justices taking a seat on the bench. He classified Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan as “two of the most rabidly anti-gun justices in history,” warning Obama would surely appoint three more justices just like them in a second term.

He also talked extensively about Operation Fast and Furious, saying it was used to slander the reputation of honest gun dealers and to push gun control through the back door. He even compared the behavior of the Justice Department and the White House to dictatorships..

“That’s the kind of thing you would expect from a South American dictator,” Pierre said referencing the ongoing attack on honest gun dealers from this administration.
“The department of justice launched a criminal enterprise.”

He pinned the ongoing cover-up of the program on the White House and NBC for refusing to report the story.

“After allowing his Justice Department to become an accessory to murder, how does the president even look at the mirror,” he said. “The fact that Eric Holder hasn’t been fired, is a disgrace…forget fired, somebody  be in jail.”

In an exclusive chat with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) here at CPAC, I had the opportunity to ask the Senate Republican Leader about a number of short and long term battles in Washington.  Our wide ranging discussion spanned several hot issues, from Obamacare repeal to the 'Fast & Furious' scandal:
 

Cheat sheet -- Here are the time stamps for each question:
 

1:00 - Are Senate Republicans backing away from Obamacare repeal as a top priority?

2:15 - What, if anything, can Congress do to block or reverse the Obama administration's unconstitutional birth control mandate?

3:30 - President Obama and Senate Democrats have been ignoring the Constitution and disregarding long-standing precedent to further their agenda.  Are you prepared to retailiate?

6:45 - What is your response to Senate Democrats' ongoing refusal to follow the law and pass a budget?

8:05 - How do Senate Republicans plan to keep the president's dreadful Keystone XL decision in the spotlight?

10:20 - Will you join Sen. Grassley and Rep. Issa in demanding complete transparency from Attorney General Holder on the Fast & Furious scandal?

11:15 - What do you make of your former Senate colleague Rick Santorum's presidential surge?

The big take-aways, from my perspective: (1) McConnell's number one priority in 2013 will be full Obamacare repeal -- if a new president is elected, of course.  (2) The minority leader has little appetite to directly retaliate for Harry Reid's unprecedented powergrabs.  (3) McConnell will force votes on both the 2013 House-passed budget resolution and President Obama's forthcoming (and pitiful) budget proposal.  (4) Senate Republicans intend to embed Keystone as a thorn in Democrats' side through the election. (5) McConnell really doesn't want to say anything that could be construed as a statement indicating his presidential preference.

Let me get this straight: Obama is offering a "compromise" without any dialoguing with those who are troubled with his policy? Furthermore, did he offer a compromise to the insurance companies who have no choice but to give away free "birth control" services? If that's not enough--just like when he used the middle finger while scratching the nose tactic--he offered a "compromise" while deriding and demeaning those he is supposed to compromising with.

This guy is just...a piece of work.

"Why would an undecided voter vote for a candidate of a party, who the party's not excited about?"

It was quite an opening day at CPAC 2012, as two emerging superstars of the movement offered compelling critiques of Obamaism, and laid out a principled path -- brick by brick -- to conservative victory.  I can only hope the remaining 2012 GOP presidential candidates were taking copious notes.  We reviewed Sen. Marco Rubio's powerful message yesterday afternoon; not to be outdone, Rep. Paul Ryan articulated his vision for "opportunity, prosperity, and growth," versus the president's road to "debt, doubt, and decline" at last night's banquet.  A few choice excerpts, via Ryan's Prosperity PAC:
 

It will not be enough to repeal the President’s disastrous health-care law. We must solve the problem in health care by curbing out-of-control costs that erode paychecks for working families and push quality coverage out of reach for millions of Americans. It will not be enough to stop the administration’s war against proven sources of American-made energy. We must build the case for developing energy here at home, to create jobs and lower the price of energy in this country. It will not be enough to stop Washington’s reckless spending spree, which has spread cronyism and corporate welfare. We must bring the bureaucracy to heel and restore the rule of law where it was replaced by the whims of those in power. And it will not be enough to condemn the President’s attempt to pit one group of Americans against another.  Instead, we must promote upward mobility, starting with solutions that speak to our broken education system, broken immigration policy, and broken safety-net programs that foster dependency instead of helping people get back on their feet...

 

While President Obama shirks his responsibility to advance solutions to our fiscal challenges, he can no longer hide from the merciless math of the balance sheet. Conservatives have made certain of that.  We have pressured the President to put forward a number of deficit-reduction proposals – and while none has offered a credible solution to our fiscal crisis, each one has revealed a little bit more about what the President would do if he were forced to end the deficits. It wouldn’t be pretty. His proposals have three things in common: they load massive tax increases on small businesses and hardworking families, they require bureaucratic rationing in government health care programs, and they hollow out our national security. Every time we force the President and his party’s leaders to get specific on how they would solve our fiscal challenges, they show us an agenda that does great harm to our economic security, our health security, and our national security...

 

The President himself is framing this election as a stark choice between two conflicting visions. Recently he said that, “The very core of what this country stands for is on the line – the notion that we’re all in this together, that we look out for one another – that’s at stake in this election.”  “We’re all in this together” versus “You’re on your own” – that’s how the President is defining this choice.  “We’re all in this together” – it’s a powerful and appropriate phrase for describing the best in our nation’s history. It speaks to our affinity for family, community, and the religious institutions through which we really do look out for one another. But the reality is that the President’s rhetoric has always conflicted with the President’s agenda. The policy agenda he has promoted weakens these very institutions. It stifles their vitality and substitutes federal power in their place. He says, “We’re all in this together” – but his re-election strategy is to divide Americans, to foster envy and resentment, and to push programs that entrench dependency and grow government...

 

Full video is HERE.  I'll leave you with Ryan laying the groundwork for his message on Fox & Friends, where he responds to a predictably dense and dishonest statement from a Democrat spokesman on Medicare reform.  Ryan does an excellent job of beating back the lies, but I'd add two additional points:  (1) The seniors who've "paid into this system for a lifetime" are exempt from Ryan's reforms, as are adults within ten years of retirement.  Under Ryan's plan, future seniors are not forced to "wither on the vine" (they'd receive an average of $18,000+ in premium subsidies by 2030), nor are the "ultra wealthy" favored -- they'd actually receive lower subsidies.  (2) Medicare "as we know it" will become insolvent within a dozen years if we do nothing, and tinkering around the margins for show will only briefly forestall that fate.  What happens to all the seniors Democrats purport to care about within that eventuality? And with that, over to you, Mr. Chairman:

"A conservative, a liberal, and a moderate walk into a bar..."

Nice.