Romney Takes Shot At Huckabee Over Leno Appearance

By: Steve Chaggaris
Topics: Mitt Romney

(CBS)

From CBS News' Scott Conroy

BETTENDORF, IOWA -- Mike Huckabee's scheduled trip to Hollywood to tape an appearance on "The Tonight Show" provided some fodder for Mitt Romney today.

"Frankly my focus is on the caucuses here in Iowa," Romney said at a press conference at a middle school here, as he was flanked by about 50 mostly younger supporters. "I think Mike is more concerned about the caucus in Los Angeles."

The sarcastic jab against Huckabee notwithstanding, Romney was surprisingly focused more on attacking John McCain — his chief rival in New Hampshire — than he was on hitting Huckabee, the man with whom Romney is vying for a first-place finish in tomorrow night's caucuses.

"I think he was just wrong to vote against the Bush tax cuts twice," Romney said of McCain in his opening remarks to reporters. "He continues to defend that vote. He continues to believe it was the right thing to vote 'no' on the Bush tax cuts, despite the fact that the Bush tax cuts helped working families, helped people meet their obligations."

Romney also criticized McCain for his stance on illegal immigration and tried to negate McCain's recent attack ad on Romney's lack of foreign policy experience. The former Massachusetts governor said that he has demonstrated leadership skills in business and in running the winter Olympics in the aftermath of 9/11.

16 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 16 Comments


by marinepatriot January 3, 2008 6:32 AM EST: No need to check out the video below from hughgous. It is just a dumb anti Huckabee video. Get over it and blame those responsible, we are tired of hearing it.

Mike Huckabee is Americas Choice!; Reply to this comment


by marinepatriot January 3, 2008 6:28 AM EST: Mike huckabee is our choice for President. We support him 100%

Dan Campbell
Sgt., USMC; Reply to this comment


by hughgous January 3, 2008 1:52 AM EST: Huckabee is such a nice guy. Check this video out. http://www.victimsvoice527.com/; Reply to this comment


by giantrobot2 January 2, 2008 10:29 PM EST: READ ALL ABOUT IT!!!

Mitt Romney is all bitter now that he spent $80,000,000 (million) dollars in campaigning funds where Mike Huckabee has spent less than $2 million.

This is the biggest upset in political history. It''s a great example for the young voters out there.

Don''t give up on your dream just because you are not extremelly rich. It doesnt take gobs of money to become famous, it takes honesty, humbleness, integrity, charisma and fun down to earth personality.

Don''t let the critics who mock you, who scorn you, who critize you, who laugh at you bring you down.

Mike Huckabee is bringing to America a new American spirit. He is bringing everyone up to Higher ground.

Don''t give up on your dreams in life, keep your strength and just remember that if underdog Mike Huckabee can win Iowa it''s not the dog in the fight, it''s the fight in the dog that wins!

Jump on Huck-a-Bus and make sure you get to the Iowa poll tomorrow on Jan 3rd to vote for Mike Huckabee. This is not just a vote for him, it''s a vote for you to use for willpower in the next struggle you go through in life.

GO MIKE GO!!! GO MIKE GO!!!

Mike Huckabee''s Rockstar status is out of this world. There hasn''t been a president like this in; Reply to this comment


by newideas1 January 2, 2008 8:48 PM EST: To jasonroiz: If you are suggesting a flat tax or the fair tax, then I agree. I do not agree with the ultra wealthy being taxed at low rates while everybody in the middle pays more (which creates a national debt that is owed equally by all citizens). I also get the concept of incentivizing people to take the risk of capital investment, but the argument is that some individuals reap the rewards without having any capital at risk.; Reply to this comment


by newideas1 January 2, 2008 8:43 PM EST: Pardon me, my "simple fact" comment related to the capital gains rate. I''m not disparaging Gov. Romney. I''ve never seen his tax returns. I don''t know him, and I don''t know anything specifically about his role at Bain Capital (or about the operations of Bain Capital). I was simply teeing up the question because I am curious why it hasn''t come up when Romney is criticising other candidates'' positions on taxation. If you have some insight, aburns8, please share it. This is supposed to be an unoffensive forum for discussion. Please be respectful. I will try to do the same.; Reply to this comment


by jasonroiz January 2, 2008 8:42 PM EST: Romney will have lots of McCain types working for him when he is chief executive. It''s Romney that has rare proven executive leadership skills needed in a president, not McCain.

If a low income person pays 15% and Romney did also. THen Romney paid way more dollars in taxes! THey paid proportionally the same. It''s as fair as can be. You don''t want to take the incentive away from business people, it''s bad for the economy. The more they make, the more the poor benefit from the massive dollars they pay in taxes. It''s effectively a flat tax.
If you''re a Bible reader/believer, it should make alot of sense, God asks all to pay 10% regardless of how much one makes.; Reply to this comment


by newideas1 January 2, 2008 8:28 PM EST: Thanks for the diatribe, but I counsel private equity and hedge funds on taxation, and I''ll bet a 1000 to 1 that you don''t. I also have an accounting degree, law degree, and masters in law degree.

Here''s how it works, simply put. Romney was co-owner in Bain Capital, which gets pass through tax treatment as a partnership (i.e., no corporate tax). Bain Capital serves as the general partner of investment funds. The general partner puts up a small fraction of capital (let''s say 1%). As an incentive allocation (i.e., "carried interest") for managing the fund, the general partner gets a larger fraction of any returns (let''s say 20%). Private equity funds seldom, if ever, liquidate their holdings in less than a year from acquisition. Therefore, the carried interest is taxed as a long-term capital gain at 15%. So, Romney paid 15% tax on the bulk of his accumulated wealth.

In 2006, the median annual household income according to the US Census Bureau was determined to be $48,201.00. Under the 2007 tax rate schedules, the effective tax rate on that income is 14.19%. If Romney had paid income tax instead of capital gains tax, his effective rate would have been a fraction under 35% (i.e., more than double).

So, unless you are in the lowest income tax bracket, you pay more in taxes dollar-for-dollar than Romney did on the bulk of his accumulated wealth. It''s a simple fact. Ask him to refute it.; Reply to this comment


by aburns8 January 2, 2008 7:27 PM EST: newideas,

You have shown your ignorance of tax laws. Regurgitating something that someone told you does not make it true.

Romney pays different types of taxes - income, as well as investment. All of us would like to save and invest. If you want higher taxes on capital gains, look at Edwards'' proposal. He''s your man. If you want to be taxed when you earn money, while you save it, and when you take it out to spend it, then vote for a democrat.

I suggest that you look at the tax bracket Romney is in and see what is rate is. Much higher than yours. I''d be willing to bet mine is as well, given your ignorance and obvious lack of education.; Reply to this comment


by newideas1 January 2, 2008 7:22 PM EST: Why hasn''t anyone questioned Romney on the fact that he accumulated his wealth at half the tax rate of middle class wage earners?; Reply to this comment