01/03/2008
Huckabee Does Leno, Hillary Does Letterman as Late Night Returns
Mike Huckabee appeared as Jay Leno's guest last night on the return of his show to late night, while Hillary Clinton introduced David Letterman on his return.
Clinton, taped from Iowa, was not faced with crossing a picket line as Letterman (and Craig Ferguson) cut deals with writers to bring them back. Leno, as well as Conan O'Brien and Jimmy Kimmel, were back without writers. Huckabee faced "scab" signs along with questioning about why he was crossing picket lines. Said chief union negotiator John Bowman: "Huckabee claims he didn’t know [the strike was still ongoing]. I don’t know what that means in terms of trusting him as a future president."
In a Bill Clinton-esque turn, Huckabee showed off his musical talents, then discussed his rivals.
Below, Hillary's brief intro.
Posted 8:11 AM EST by Andy Towle in Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, Mike Huckabee, News, Television | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I am all for Huckabee's tax plan! Bring on the FairTax!!! And sooner than later.
Posted by: RB | Jan 3, 2008 10:48:54 AM
The so-called "Fair Tax" is anything but fair. It's regressive and will serve to punish the middle and lower class while rewarding the upper class.
The middle and low class will see much more of their income go toward taxes than it currently does.
For example, a 10% VAT/Flat/"Fair" tax is a much bigger slice of a person's income for someone making between poverty (which is currently approximately $10,000/year) and $100,000 than someone making above $100,000/year.
We have a progressive tax for a reason.
Posted by: MississippiTim | Jan 3, 2008 12:32:29 PM
RB,
MISSISSIPPITIM is correct. The 'Fair Tax' sounds like such a great idea...simple, easy, and, well, fair! But is not fair. It only sounds that way. A flat tax means a much greater percentage of the incomes of lower and middle class workers will go toward paying taxes. Such a scenario will keep them from making economic gains.
During the Bush years, the upper class has made economic gains that are grossly out of proportion to the gains made by the lower and middle classes. This has resulted in a situation in which the gap between the middle class and the upper class is greater than ever before. A flat tax will further exacerbate the gap between the lower/middle class and the upper class. I personally don't think that makes for a strong America.
RB, you've written on these pages about your desire to be able to afford a house. Unless your net worth is over $10,000,000.00 or you earn over $250,000.00, the so-called 'Fair Tax' will only make that goal more difficult for you to obtain.
Besides, RB, hopefully we can all agree that Mike 'isolate people with HIV and AIDS' Huckabee is a scumbag...right?
xo,
peterparker
Posted by: peterparker | Jan 3, 2008 2:03:12 PM
A flat income tax with a high standard deduction would be the most fair. $25K for a standard deduction would keep the poor from paying income taxes. Payroll taxes ARE a flat tax with no deductions whatsoever, however, and everyone forgets about them...
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Jan 3, 2008 2:35:53 PM
We currenly have a "productivity" tax and NOTHING about that is fair!!! For example, a father gets a second job to help put his kid throught college. However, the second job places him in a higher tax bracket and the new taxes almost take what he makes on the second job!
Under the plan that some here endorse, he should simply quit both jobs and become unemployed and get government assistance for his kid to go to college. Would that be better?
How about a fair system that rewards honest hard work by not taxing the ever loving hell out of it?! There is a reason why the populations of young and wealthy in Denmark and France are declining/moving...TAXES! the top tax brackets in those countries are 62% and 60% respectively. That is insane and yet so many do not get that. Add on "universal health care" and we will be there in the States.
The fair tax does not offset the poor. It is a democrat scare tactic the likes of the republican terrorist tactic. Same strategy, different party.
And Peterparker, you always seem to try to make this personal. I have posted in the past against eminant domain so I will NEVER loose my home! I have two, but thanks for the concern.
Take care
Posted by: RB | Jan 4, 2008 10:32:21 AM
RB
Excuse me for misunderstanding one of your previous posts from months ago. I believed you were expressing a desire to own a home. I was not aware that you already are a homeowner.
A flat tax *does* hurt the poor. It results in a greater percentage of lower/middle class families' earnings going to state and federal governments. Think about the following scenario: Steve Ballmer, billionaire co-founder of Microsoft shells out $300,000 for a new Rolls Royce Phantom with a flat tax of 10%. Ballmer would pay $30,000 in taxes. That sounds like a lot of taxes for an automobile...until you consider that Steve Ballmer surely earns hundreds of millions of dollars each year in interest on his billions. Assuming an income of $100 million per year (which is modest for Steve Ballmer), about .03% of Ballmer's income has gone to paying taxes on his new luxury car. Meanwhile, consider a lower-middle class family in the Midwest eyeing the 'previously owned' Ford Taurus on the lot at the local Ford dealer. The family needs a new car to shuttle kids to school and Dad to work at the local meatpacking plant. Dad earns $45,000 a year (maybe) while Mom earns $25,000 as a secretary. The 'previously owned' Ford Taurus on the dealer's lot is going to set them back $11,000. A ten percent flat tax means that $1,100, 1.5% of their earnings, is going to the government.
The real tragedy of a flat tax is that working class families end up giving up a greater percentage of their earnings to pay for necessities like clothing, food, transportation, etc...while millionaires and billionaires consume luxury goods and STILL pay a smaller percentage of their incomes to the government.
Finally, RB...it's eminEnt domain...and I don't know what percentage of private property is seized by the government each year, but I'm guessing it is even less than the percentage of income a billionaire would pay on the purchase of a new Rolls Royce in the scenario of a flat tax.
xo,
peterparker
Posted by: peterparker | Jan 4, 2008 1:49:21 PM
Peterparker, and you say on the republicans can spin! How many parents working two jobs to send there kids to college are there in comparison to Steve Ballmer? I am talking about real people in the real world. The one that it appears from our conversations in the past that you do not live in. I do. I know what it is like to have nothing and I know what it is like to be successful! I want real solutions for real people and NOT tirades about Steve Ballmer!
And yes, I apologize for the typo and I appreciate your english lesson.
Take care
RB
Posted by: RB | Jan 4, 2008 6:13:15 PM
RB,
There are MILLIONS of American families who struggle to afford mortgages, college and even necessities like food/transportation/clothing...and a flat tax would mean every one of them would pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the tens or hundreds of thousands of millionaires and billionaires that live in this country. You can't argue with math, RB.
And RB, I've never written anything about your life outside of towleroad that you did not first bring into the conversation here. I will thank you to show me the same courtesy.
xo,
peterparker
Posted by: peterparker | Jan 4, 2008 8:46:14 PM
It is obvious from the comments on this page you people have a very limited knowledge of the Fairtax. At least try to learn what you are critizing. Duh!
Posted by: Darrell Sikes | Jan 5, 2008 10:49:54 AM
The FairTax is nothing more than a fraud that shifts the tax burden from the wealthiest to the middle class, with a rebate smokescreen thrown in to help a handful of the poorest. Criticism of the FairTax is very rare in the press and that's a crying shame. Hate Radio spends every working hour promoting it on their daily radio programs, yet this tax plan sees no critical analysis in the mainstream media. The most complete analysis on the dirty little secrets of the FairTax can be found at fairtaxfraud.com.
Posted by: FairTaxFraud | Jan 5, 2008 10:56:51 AM
You guys are amazing. “From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need”.
So, we need a progressive tax? That's one of the main points of the communist manifesto, along with government schools (which we already have).
The FairTax completely relieves any person or family below the poverty line from paying any Federal Tax. With that done, why do you care what portion any other person pays as long as the government gets the $$ it needs to function?
The FairTax will make the US the best place in the world to have a company headquarters. The FairTax will also put US products on a more even footing with foreign product because of foreign tax structures.
The US economy would explode, much like the "Irish Miracle" that is happening in Irelend today.
Go to www.fairtax.org to find out or get the new book "FairTax: The Truth: Answering the Critics".
Posted by: ALibertarian | Jan 5, 2008 4:45:49 PM
Yeah maybe fiction reflects relaity.
http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i28439
Posted by: Jill | Jan 5, 2008 8:50:48 PM