http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Snapz-Pro-XScreenSnapz437-620x329.png
I thought you were talking about the lying personal attacks against Gingrich.
I think we should all expect the candidates to run ads comparing records and contrasting positions. Yes, that is also “negative” when those positions are not favorable to a candidate, but that’s not what most of us complain about when we grouse about “negative ads”.
For example, if someone ran an ad saying that Romneycare was the basis for Obamacare, that would be a negative ad, but we wouldn’t object to it being run. If someone ran an ad pointing out that Gingrich made a commercial with Nancy Pelosi, that would also be negative, but wouldn’t be a false personal attack.
Newt HAS been running ads and making comments contrasting his positions with Rick Santorum, and Rick has been doing the same. We would expect no less.
I thought the objection about “negative ads in Florida” was about how Santorum wasn’t trying to win Florida, and so shouldn’t have been attacking Gingrich there. That’s why I made the point that Santorum didn’t run ads or robocalls in Florida.