I disagree. If your opponent launches an attack on you that is impossible for you to defend against, then by definition you’ve lost. Newt needs to look back to why he lost Iowa, because he’s going down the same path.
There are two ways to answer those attacks, disprove the claims, or simply say that’s not true and then spin it around to launch a series of attacks back at Romney. There were openings to attack Romney on his governorship and on his tenure at Bain Capital to spin the focus back on him and Newt didn’t take them. “I’m going to stay positive and not attack Governor Romney” is what lost in Iowa. Newt can’t unilaterally disengage from the fight. At this point attacking Romney serves as a demonstration to the voters of how he will attack Obama and that’s what voters want to see.
He didn't disengage.
I will not chase Romney's misinformation. He just said about four things that were false and you can check on my website. This is the worst kind of trivial politics. We have an ad where Huckabee and McCain talk about how Romney can't tell the truth. ...Wait a second, he just went on and on and on. He is a terrible historian. The vote on the ethics committee was in January 1997 and I asked the Republicans to vote YES to get it behind us. We took control of the House in 40 years and the Democrats were bitter. The only thing we did wrong was that I didn't pay one fine but then I paid it and I wanted it behind us. We had four balanced budgets after that vote. You ought to do is stop and look at those facts. We won the House for the third time in 1998 but the margin was not big enough. In 2006 when you chaired the Governor's association we lost governorship so as a party builder I have the record and you don't.
Yes Newt did respond, he just said that the details were at Newt.org. If you recalled he very clearly said that Romney had just lied 4 times. He also attacked Romney's deficient governorship.
Everything you asked for above was done by Newt.