Des Moines (CNN) - Hours before Iowa caucuses, the Ron Paul campaign has launched its sharpest anti-Romney attack ad yet, a one-minute radio spot calling the former Massachusetts governor a "liberal" who has supported government bailouts, healthcare mandates and big government.
The ad was running in Iowa Tuesday morning and afternoon.
CNN Live: Tune in tonight at 7 p.m. ET for CNN's live special coverage of the Iowa Caucuses and follow real-time results on CNNPolitics.com and on Twitter at #cnnelections. Stay up to date with CNN apps for iPhone, iPad, Android or other phones.
The announcer reads, "Mitt Romney can't fight against Obamacare because he supported the same mandates and government takeovers as governor of Massachusetts. Romney can't stand up against more bailouts because he supported them. He can't lead the charge to shrink the government because he has grown it."
The ad is testimony to Paul's concerns about Romney, who is the frontrunner in recent Iowa polls. The final-day, closing-argument radio spot directly attacks what some perceive as Romney's strength: electability.
"Romney's record is liberal and putting him up against Obama is a recipe for defeat," the announcer reads, "That candidate who can beat Obama is Dr. Ron Paul."
The radio ad also extends a Paul theme, using the word "liberal" to slam his opponents on fiscal policies, including earmarks and spending.
In an interview with CNN's Dana Bash Monday, Paul called opponent Rick Santorum "very liberal".
"He spends too much money," Paul said.
Paul's campaign confirmed placing the Tuesday radio ad.
- Dana Bash contributed to this report.
- Follow Lisa Desjardins on Twitter: @LisaDCNN
Gingrich: Romney is lying
Bachmann looks ahead to South Carolina
Gingrich suggests a Tuesday win
Gingrich strives for 'great upset' in Iowa
WOW, the elading repub candidae is a liberal! Im not a Paul supporter but I have to agree with him, Mitt is nothing more than a rich guy who wants so bad to be president that in the past he was a liberal now he says he's a conservative. One thing for sure he's a flip flopper, full blown washington politician that can never tell the truth.
When Mittens is called 'liberal', you know the Republican party is too far to the right. It means they can even see the middle of the road from where they stand. I'm just surprised to see this coming from Ron Paul. I would have expected it from one of the uber-right-wing candidates, not a libertarian like Paul.
This isn't sharp. It really is a desperate move from Ron Paul to win Iowa. Yet, this message has things that have already been discussed time after time. Nothing new. It looks to me that all the GOP contenders want Romney to be the nominee. They are not attacking much, and when they do, it is something that they know is not very accurate and something they know will not affect Romney much. That is good for Romney and for America.
Vote Romney !!!
Republican on Republican crime! The left is loving it!
Interesting the GOP is arguably supporting the most liberal (flip-flop Romney) and most conservative (Paul) in the primary.
Then again, that was until Mitt decided to become a pandering neo-Con against Paul's literal conservatism.
Actually, Romney doesn't have a record as a "liberal" any more than he has one as a "conservative". He's a soulless robot with no principles whatsoever, other than blindly serving the corrupt elites who pull his strings.
Wow, they're all sliming each other.
Why doesn't someone just put trunks on them all and put them in a mud pit instead of having a formal caucus?
Ron Paul is telling it how it is.
Paul is the only true conservative in the race, and the only supposedly liberal stance he has is on bringing our troops home (which at it's foundation, is for FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE reasons). Paul's military donations outweigh the entire Republican field for a reason, his top 3 donators are the US ARMY, US NAVY, and US AIR FORCE for a reason. He's the one who is serious about actually cutting up spending and destroying our nation's biggest threat to our national security, the 16 trillion $ debt we carry.
Mitt Romney and Obamal are both financed by Goldman Sachs. Someone please explain how their policies would be any different? They both want to attack Iran and start WW 3.
A choice between Romney and Obama would be like Kudos and Kang from the Simpsons. We NEED Ron Paul now.
I wouldn't vote Romney for anything, if anything is worse thanObama it's Romney!!!!
YES! Vote ROMNEY. I want a president who will start ww3 with Iran too! that way we can plunge the country into even more debt! That should really boost our national defense don't you think? Sounds great guys!
Ron Paul 2012 Please
Track Record and Substance OVER Flip Flopping Rhetoric and Fear Mongering
When I press play it says I must login in order to listen.
No Ron Paul please. That will mean the end of the US. If he is elected, I might have to move down south to Costa Rica or Colombia. That way, I can avoid the nuclear missiles from Iran.
Ron Paul 2012... Freedom, Liberty and Peace!
Whatever. Mittens wears magic undies and Rondroid engages in magic thinking. Two peas in the crazypod if you ask me.
Romney is a flip-flopping chameleon, who takes whatever position is politically expedient at the time.
Romney was pro-choice, believed global climate change science, and supported healthcare mandates.
Romney's business career was primarily as a corporate raider who did not build, but dismantled companies for profits, making a profit by consuming the value created by others and laying off workers, sending jobs overseas, and creating more unemployment when the raided companies imploded, putting all the remaining workers in the unemployment line.
Say NO to Romney – soul-less chameleon and corporate parasite. He's simply wrong for America.
Probably too little too late to make a difference at this point. Most will have made up their minds. But it is funny for Ron Paul, who wants to decriminalize everything, to be calling others "liberal". One thing is for sure, Newt has got to be loving it!
Romney is a LIAR.
Ron Paul is not a conservative, he is a libertarian. If you cannot tell the difference, you deserve exactly what you vote for.
George Washington, Ron Paul has passed 1 bill in 12 terms. That is his track record. His substance is in the news letters he claims he had no control over and yet bore his name, so what I'm left to conclude is that you have a man who is bored with the job of being a legislator, yet has been at it intermittently for over 3 decades, and has allowed rascist and violent rhetoric to be published under his name which he won't accept responsibility for. He is more of a career politican than Romney, and an even bigger failure on the national stage.
I really wish RP would use the word "fiscal" in front of liberal. As it is, he seems crazy for calling Mittorem liberal. He's right, but when people hear liberal they think pro-choice and gay rights. The diference between social liberal and fiscal liberal. And most every politician seems to be a fiscal liberal these days. Spend spend spend and only cut the other sides programs rather than compromise and reduce spending across the board.
Phil in KC, Ron's ad doesn't use "liberal" to generalize or belittle the liberal perspective. He uses it to show the sandal wear of choice for most of the Republican runners. Mitt has been the most notorious flip-flopper of the entire GOP's candidates for President. Ron Paul isn't arrogant or "uber right-winged" at all. A libertarian is not right wing. He uses "liberal" because he knows how much the other ignorant "conservative" candidates hate that word and ideology. He's using their own ignorance against them. Don't be so assuming.
"But it is funny for Ron Paul, who wants to decriminalize everything, to be calling others "liberal".
What's "funny" is that you (a) don't seem to understand the meaning of the works "liberal" and "conservative" and (b) that a party that claims to be about "freedom" wants to criminalize so many things. Paul is right and the rest of you are nuts.
Ron Paul has passed 1 bill in 12 terms. That is his track record
Only liberals gauge their "success" by how many laws they can pass to further weaken personal freedoms and grant the government more and more power. When will it all end? After a million laws? Ten million??