<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>Media Matters - A.B. Stoddard</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/tools/syndication/tag_rss/a_b__stoddard</link>
<description>This link is for use by RSS-enabled software to retrieve Media Matters items matching the term: A.B. Stoddard</description>
<language>en-US</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008, Media Matters for America</copyright>

<item>
<title>Purporting to read Clark quote, &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x27;s &#x3C;/em&#x3E;Stoddard omitted major parts of &#x3C;em&#x3E;Face the Nation&#x3C;/em&#x3E; exchange  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200807020009</link>
<description>In an online video on &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s website, A.B. Stoddard purported to &#x22;read the quote&#x22; from retired Gen. Wesley Clark&#x27;s interview with &#x3C;em&#x3E;Face the Nation&#x3C;/em&#x3E; host Bob Schieffer. In fact, Stoddard did not fully &#x22;read the quote,&#x22; omitting major parts of the exchange, including Clark&#x27;s praise of Sen. John McCain and Schieffer&#x27;s comments.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200807020009</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 Jul 2008 18:05:02 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Stoddard baselessly asserted Obama &#x22;doesn&#x27;t think he&#x27;s going to win Ohio and Florida&#x22;  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200806030003</link>
<description>During &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s online video segment &#x22;Ask A.B.,&#x22; A.B. Stoddard asserted: &#x22;[Sen.] Barack Obama has pretty much conceded that he doesn&#x27;t think that he&#x27;s going to win Ohio and Florida, two states that are necessary to becoming president of the United States -- usually.&#x22; Stoddard offered no evidence to support this claim. In fact, the &#x3C;em&#x3E;South Florida Sun-Sentinel&#x3C;/em&#x3E; recently quoted Rep. Robert Wexler, co-chairman of Obama&#x27;s Florida campaign, as saying Obama &#x22;is confident he will win Florida,&#x22; and a recent SurveyUSA poll shows Obama leading Sen. John McCain by nine percentage points in Ohio.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200806030003</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 3 Jun 2008 14:29:50 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard falsely claimed Obama attempting to &#x22;get away from&#x22; national security, John McCain&#x27;s &#x22;comfort zone&#x22;  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200805290007</link>
<description>In an online video segment, A.B. Stoddard described national security as Sen. John McCain&#x27;s &#x22;comfort zone&#x22; and asserted that Sen. Barack Obama &#x22;hasn&#x27;t quite figured out yet how to get away from it, but he will. He has a few months to figure out how to always lob it back to the economy.&#x22; But far from attempting &#x22;to get away&#x22; from the issue of national security, Obama has challenged McCain to debate the issue.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200805290007</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 16:41:28 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Some MSNBC journalists identify a media double standard in coverage of McCain gaffe; others demonstrate it  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200803200011</link>
<description>After Chuck Todd acknowledged a media double standard in coverage of Sen. John McCain&#x27;s Al Qaeda-Iran gaffe, CNBC&#x27;s John Harwood asserted on &#x3C;em&#x3E;Morning Joe&#x3C;/em&#x3E;: &#x22;I think that at the end of the day, John McCain has got sufficient credibility on that issue that people are not going to look at that and say, &#x27;Oh, John McCain is confused&#x27; or &#x27;John McCain&#x27;s too old&#x27; or &#x27;John McCain doesn&#x27;t get it.&#x27; ... But he obviously can&#x27;t do that too many times or he&#x27;s got a problem.&#x22; Harwood was not alone in misrepresenting or excusing McCain&#x27;s false claim on MSNBC; several MSNBC reporters and anchors have ignored or excused McCain&#x27;s false claim.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200803200011</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:01:40 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Brewer and Stoddard failed to note FCC chairman&#x27;s criticism of McCain&#x27;s letter for Paxson  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200802220005</link>
<description>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;MSNBC Live&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, discussing the &#x3C;em&#x3E;New York Times&#x3C;/em&#x3E; article on Sen. John McCain&#x27;s ties to lobbyist Vicki Iseman, Contessa Brewer asked A.B. Stoddard, &#x22;[I]n Washington, is it unusual if you get a letter from a constituent or a lobbyist on a matter, and you&#x27;re concerned about it, that you would move on it?&#x22; Brewer was referring to the &#x3C;em&#x3E;Times&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27; reporting that Iseman &#x22;asked Mr. McCain&#x27;s staff to send a letter to the [Federal Communications] commission to help Paxson [Communications], now Ion Media Networks.&#x22; Stoddard replied, &#x22;Senators and members of Congress act all the time on behalf of concerns from their constituents, as well as lobbyists, if they think that they are valid points to make, and they&#x27;re acting on their own beliefs.&#x22; But neither Brewer nor Stoddard noted that then-FCC chairman William E. Kennard expressed concern about McCain&#x27;s letter, calling it &#x22;highly unusual.&#x22;  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200802220005</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:31:39 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;The  Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard on  Paws&#x27; donations: &#x22;[T]his is exactly the kind of thing that could  bring [Hillary Clinton] down&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200708290014</link>
<description>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;Tucker&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, while discussing a &#x3C;em&#x3E;Wall 
Street Journal&#x3C;/em&#x3E; article that suggested a major donor may have funneled illegal campaign 
contributions to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, A.B. Stoddard asserted that &#x22;this is exactly the kind of thing that could 
bring her down.&#x22; However, as 
the &#x3C;em&#x3E;Journal&#x3C;/em&#x3E; article 
itself reported: &#x22;[R]egulators and 
law-enforcement officials said they have seen a spike recently in the number of 
cases of individuals and companies illegally reimbursing others for campaign 
donations. Those cases don&#x27;t necessarily implicate the candidates, who sometimes 
don&#x27;t even appear to be aware of such payments executed on their behalf.&#x22;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200708290014</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:55:41 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>On MSNBC, &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard claimed Democrats &#x22;have an Al Qaeda problem&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200707270003</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200707270003</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:48:08 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Front-page &#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash. Times &#x3C;/em&#x3E;article touted Pelosi&#x27;s popularity in Syria with purported person-on-the-street interviews</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200705030001</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200705030001</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 3 May 2007 10:56:25 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>CNN&#x27;s Roberts, &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard uncritically repeated claim that Pelosi &#x22;fumbled&#x22; Israel&#x27;s message to Syria</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200704090006</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200704090006</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Apr 2007 14:46:07 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>On MSNBC, &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard cited unnamed &#x22;discrepancies&#x22; from Obama&#x27;s memoir</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200704040012</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200704040012</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Apr 2007 18:21:40 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard: Dems &#x22;need to prove themselves on national security&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200701110007</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200701110007</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 13:03:47 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Before midterms, media downplayed potential Dem gains in House and Senate, touting GOP&#x27;s &#x22;formidable&#x22; and &#x22;stunning&#x22; get-out-the-vote campaign; will they revisit?</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200611090001</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200611090001</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:00:05 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>On &#x3C;em&#x3E;Hardball&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Stoddard accepted Novak&#x27;s claim that CIA leak was &#x22;inadvertent&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200607130012</link>
<description>&#x3C;em&#x3E;The Hill&#x3C;/em&#x3E; associate editor A.B. Stoddard claimed that &#x22;we learned&#x22; from Robert Novak&#x27;s syndicated column that the leak of then-CIA employee Valerie Plame&#x27;s identity &#x22;was inadvertent.&#x22; But Novak&#x27;s assertion that the leak was &#x22;inadvertent&#x22; appears to conflict with an earlier assertion he made, that his sources thought Plame&#x27;s identity &#x22;was significant&#x22; and that &#x22;they gave me the name and I used it.&#x22;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200607130012</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:53:54 EST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>