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