Gingrich calls on his Super-PAC to correct inaccuracies or pull anti-Bain ads

The Hill dot com ^ | 1-13-12 | Justin Sink

[bigbob]

Newt Gingrich has called on the Super-PAC funding a series of ads critical of Mitt Romney's job creation record at Bain Capital to fix inaccuracies in the ads or remove them from the air.

“I am calling for the Winning Our Future Super-PAC supporting me to either edit its “King of Bain” advertisement and movie to remove its inaccuracies, or to pull it off the air and off the internet entirely," Gingrich said in a statement released Friday.

“Furthermore, I am once again calling on Governor Romney to issue a similar call for the Super-PAC supporting him to edit or remove its ads which have been shown to contain gross inaccuracies, something the Governor has thus far refused to do."

[bigbob]

Newt attempting to mitigate the damage done on his behalf by his superpac, which of course he cannot control or have direct contact with.

Will it help Newt? Or will Romney refuse, following the rule of not interfering when your enemy is self-destructing?

[truthkeeper]

It gets weirder and weirder.

[fred4prez]

He’s said he has no control over the SuperPACs, so which is it??

[sheikdetailfeather]

Romney will maintain he has no control and the ads are correct. Even anti-Newt pro Romney Fox news showed all of the old false ad yesterday when they had the Romney guy Mr. Talent on with Martha McCallum talking. (America’s Newsroom) That is the same old false ad that Gingrich sent a legal notice to media not to run or they would face legal consequences.

[Logical me]

Go Newt. There are still idiots that believe that both Newt and Romney endorse or have any control over the PAC. You will still find idiots that do not understand the PACs.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

So all of the freepers defending Newt’s stance on Bain Capital, are you willing to admit that Newt went too far? Seems like Newt is.

I like Newt 1000 times more than Mittens and would vote for him in a heartbeat over Willard. However, none of those reasons have to do with Bain Capital and free markets. I guess it doesn’t really matter who I’d vote for because this contest will be long decided by the time I get a chance to vote in Pennsylvania.

[Red_Devil 232]

There are “inaccuracies” in the ads? What are they? The article does not elaborate or even explain them. Nor does Newt.

[baddog 219]

[Old Teufel Hunden]

Newt’s superpac should pull the current adds on Bain Capital and put up adds about Romneycare. Show the film clip of Obama claiming that he modelled Obamacare on Romneycare. Play that over and over again in South Carolina and see how conservatives like that.

[Red_Devil 232]

The Pac can do as they please they can comply with Newt’s request or not. The article nor Newt explain what these “inaccuracies” are.

[wardaddy]

what the hell are you smoking Bob?

those ads have creamed Romney in SC with Newt now in the margin of error

they did their damage and now Newt can play “innocent”

it's war...Romney drew first blood in Iowa and toppled Newt from a nice perch and now he's getting it back

and will have to answer for maybe/maybe not shady biz claims

he says he created 100,000 new jobs...he did not

and so forth

now Newt and his Supers need to pour on the regional heat and pound Mitts social issue liberalism

this is where Mitt is weakest and believe me...it plays in Dixie

Southerners unlike New Hampshire care quite a bit about abortion, queer marriage and whatnot

these next debates will be killer and SC will be watching

thank you Sheldon Adelson...you gave Newt a chance basically all by yourself...big hug..I knew there was a reason I stayed at the Venetian last June

[bigbob]

I’ve been upset about the choice of attacking Romney’s Bain experience from the get-go. Out of all the other weaknesses that they could have targeted, it’s just a shame that conservative Republicans decided to get into a urinating contest over capitalism instead.

As I understand it, the candidates cannot legally have any direct contact or influence over what the superpacs do. So what Newt is trying to do here is indirectly indirect the content of the ads, which the superpac can ignore if it chooses.

[RitaOK]

So long as Newt is seen being his rational, reasonable self, posing this rational and reasonable suggestion to edit all inaccuracies, or else do away with the film, does not say that the Newt-PAC production has any inaccuracies.

Newt is quite capable of pointing out inaccuracies, IF and where they exist, and is free to criticize PAC creations, regardless who produced them, including his own.

More information needed. This is a smoke and mirrors war between Romney and Newt. I hope Newt wins.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

I think Newt’s strategy may be a sound one here. He’s setting this up as an issue at the debate. He can turn to Romney and say I’ve called off the dogs. Are you going to do the same?

I don’t know exactly what is in Romney’s attack adds (having never heard them) so I can’t say if Newt has a legitimate beef or not.

I understand Romney’s Superpac latest attack add is against Santorum about earmarks. He’s my guy but that is probably true. Thing is, if you’re in the Congress for 20 years, chances are you are going to have voted for earmarks whether you agreed with them or not. There might be a great bill but it has earmarks you don’t agree with. So you vote for it because the bill overall is good. Earmarks is not that big of an issue with me. It’s a small part of the federal budget and there are much bigger fish to fry. For all we know his signature bill (welfare reform) had odious earmarks in it. He still should have voted for it IMO. So while it’s true, it’s misleading.

These guys need to go after Romney on Romneycare!!!!

[bigbob]

OK, you make an interesting point. I can understand it better if Newt’s superpac did this as part of a strategy, countering what they felt were inaccurate ads by Romney with similar attacks of their own, with the intention all along of backing off after the damage is done. Maybe something analogous to a boxer getting in a couple of “low blows” to soften up his opponent early in a fight.

Don’t get me wrong, I think Newt is the best anti-Romney choice, I just didn’t think that attacking capitalism was the way to go.

[tirednvirginia]

What Mitt did at Bain Capital should be a warning sign that this man is ruthless and everyone should consider it to be a huge character flaw.

Mitt has no values in life as he has flip-flopped on every single one of them depending on the office he is seeking.

He has no feelings and will lay off hundreds of people to reach his goal.

Decent human beings don’t change their values nor do they make huge profits by screwing folks.

In the end, he will screw the entire county to reach his goal of being President of the United States - the most powerful person in the world.

[freespirited]

There are “inaccuracies” in the ads? What are they? The article does not elaborate or even explain them. Nor does Newt.

It's been a while since I saw the ads, but the one thing that I remember that struck me as inaccurate was a claim that Newt supports amnesty for 11 million illegals. I think that is a gross exaggeration of his position and don't blame him for taking exception to it.

Newt has made clear through his lawyers letter to tv stations that he considers the claim he was fined $300,000 for ethics violations to be false. Newt claims he was not fined, but was asked to reimburse for the cost of the investigations. His basis for this is lost on me, the sanction was clearly reported as a fine when it happened and as I recall Newt did admit wrongdoing and apologize.

[DManA]

Because of the idiotic campaign finance laws no candidate can coordinate strategy with a pac. Newt is probably breaking the law by making this statement.

[wardaddy]

I am not 100% sure about Bain...I actually know someone personally here in Nashville that was in their local office where they worked on healthcare starts....they are just another boutique capital firm

But they also were big into leveraged buyouts..something I am familiar with on a small scale from experience and I am not a fan. They often reward management and the buyout firm at the expense of shareholders and debt holders....and yes employees and yes I am old school...I do think a business has some responsibility to it’s employees

It’s debatable that is good for capitalism. Rush in his hurry to stay neutral (putting it nicely) treated these attacks as on capitalism itself...as though anything goes in capitalism..something I see folks say here on occasion which I do not agree with...we have reigned it in on occasion...monopolies and collusion etc

and Rush aped the establishment GOP and Roger Ailes in doing so...Rush must think one not critique business period.

I disagree and to quote another freeper...

“To claim if Newt attacks Mitt on Bain is an attack on capitalism”

is akin to:

“Saying to be anti abortion is an attack on the medical profession”

Romney can defend himself or not.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

The candidates cannot have direct contact with these Super-PACs.

Romney grins and smiles and says “I can’t do anything about it”

Gingrich just called him out on it. If Gingrich can call on his Super-PAC to correct the problems with the Bain ads, then Romney can clearly call on his Super-PAC to correct the problems with the anti-Newt ads.