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