Pocket, I'd enjoy reading a correction if you have time to put one together.
The whole thing tries to pain Newt as being anti-gun. All by throwing out petty reasons, wild accusation, and severely distorting the truth.
First, the National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey is retarded. It's nothing more than a far right-wing pro-gun and conspiracy blog site. Why on earth should Newt waste his time filling out their bogus survey and submitting it? Not only that, but what Binder copied and pasted to begin this thread, actual comes from THAT SITE! Here is the link to that very article:
The Inconvenient Truth About Newt | National Association for Gun Rights
Wow, so this site creates this article, then blasts Newt for not returning their own stupid survey.
Second, the article takes normal legislation and intentionally twists it around. The Lautenberg Gun Ban is legislation that prevents those who are CONVICTED of domestic violence, or who are CURRENTLY under restraining orders for abuse. The Lautenberg Gun Ban does NOT state at all under which methods of domestic violence are accepted, and which ones are not. Yet the article claims things such as "spanking a child" and "grabbing a spouse's wrist" are valid reasons under the act, and that somehow Newt supported this. No, Newt supported not allowing abusers and those convicted of domestic violence to own guns. Most people, even strict pro-gun activists, agree with this.
Furthermore, the article goes on with taking legislation and blowing it out of proportion. It makes up statements such as “Criminal Safe Zones Act” in order to exaggerate and blow things out of proportion. There is no such thing as the “Criminal Safe Zones Act”. What it's actually hinting toward in a round-a-bout way is the Gun-Free School Zones Act. This act prohibits firearms at schools. In no way does it "protect the criminals who ignore them".
Then it goes on to claim things like Newt said that global warming was man-made and that we need a government solution. Yes, he appeared on a TV commercial with Pelosi, but here is what was actually said:
Obviously that is a completely different message than the article claims. Not once does the commercial claim that global warming is man-made, and not once does it claim government mandates. Instead, it's simply advocating cleaner energy solutions. What's so wrong about that?
So yes, LOTS of misinformation. Plus there's the clear agenda of the web site attacking Newt simply because he didn't return their meaningless gun survey. Sorry, but the whole article, as well as the site, is bogus.
And this next part isn't directed to Suns..... See folks, I simply separate fact from fiction. I don't go around supporting only the left. Here is a blog clearly attacking someone on the right, and doing it with mis-information, bias, and intentional lies. And guess what, I went after the article and pointed out what is true, and what is fiction. But I'm sure there's a few folks who will quickly forget about this, or even ignore it.