Mike (Perot backer) says that Time should not have printed the cover in

question in the first place if they didn't want to be associated with it

now - There's several things wrong with that argument

 

1) the cover and article were done in April; I doubt that Time would have

printed such a cover in October

 

2) the cover is far more dramatic and pointed than anything in the

article - Several folks at Time have said that the cover was too

strong for the article

 

3) the commercial is not "free publicity"

 

4) I doubt that the commerical is compelling very many voters to go

back and look for the article