For the record, this is not an Obama campaign ad, it's a Super-PAC ad.
The commercial, entitled "Understands" includes a man named Joe Soptic, worked for a company that was bought by Bain Capital and ultimately lead to the man being laid off, losing his health insurance. Shortly thereafter, at least according to the ad, his wife Ranae was diagnosed with advanced cancer and died. The insinuation of the ad is that Mitt Romney is somehow responsible for the death of this woman because his company had to lay off this man which caused him to lose his health insurance and therefore they couldn't afford proper medical care.
This ad is in INCREDIBLY poor taste. First and foremost, one cannot blame an employer for daring to lay off an employee due to business reasons for a medical condition that the employer did nothing to cause. Furthermore, Mitt Romney WASN'T RUNNING BAIN when this happened, so even if you bought the baloney chain of causation argument, you STILL couldn't pin it on Mitt with an ounce of truth.
There are more huge lies of ommission in this ad, as well. According to the liberal Washington Post's fact-check page:
In the ad, Soptic says: “When Mitt Romney and Bain closed the plant, I lost my healthcare, and my family lost their healthcare. And a short time after that my wife became ill.”
The operative phrase is “short time.” The plant closed down in 2001. Politico first reported that Ranae Soptic died in 2006—five years later.
Wait just one darn minute...you're telling me she died FIVE YEARS after the plant was shut down? And what, pray tell, was Mr. Soptic doing for five years? For that matter, was Mrs. Soptic possibly working and insured?
Well, as a matter of fact, she was, according to the above Washington Post fact-check page:
CNN reported that, from speaking with Soptic, it had learned that his wife had continued to have her own insurance after the plant was shut down. She later lost the coverage in 2002 or 2003 when she left her own job because of an injury.
So wait a minute...Mr. Soptic losing his job DIDN'T cost Mrs. Soptic HER insurance? She had her own for another 1-2 years? So Mrs. Soptic wasn't even covered by her husband's insurance in the first place?
Bottom line is this, friends: Even the liberal Washington Post gave this ad Four Pinocchios. What does that mean? Well according to the Washington Post Fact Check Page's explanation of their ratings:
One Pinocchio: Some shading of the facts. Selective telling of the truth. Some omissions and exaggerations, but no outright falsehoods.
Two Pinocchios: Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. A politician can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people.
Three Pinocchios: Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.
Four Pinocchios: Whoppers. (That would be outright and complete lies, for those of you from Palm Beach County, FL. Also a hamburger served at your local Burger King.)
So basically even the Liberal Washington Post is pointing out that this article is laced with blatantly false conclusions that attempt to paint Governor Romney as somehow culpable in the death of Mrs. Soptic. Unfortunately, the truth doesn't back it up.