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

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

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

<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash. Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;, AP reported on Vets for Freedom ad without noting McCain campaign surrogates&#x27; link  </title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200807070012</link>
<description>In an article about a Vets for Freedom (VFF) television ad, &#x3C;em&#x3E;The Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; reported that VFF chairman Pete Hegseth denied that his organization is operating on behalf of Sen. John McCain, but &#x22;conceded that the message in the ad is almost identical to McCain&#x27;s on the stump.&#x22; Similarly, the Associated Press reported that McCain &#x22;is getting ... help from&#x22; the VFF television ad campaign. But neither the &#x3C;em&#x3E;Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E; nor the AP mentioned that Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- McCain supporters and frequent campaign surrogates -- had served on the VFF Policy Board of Advisors.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200807070012</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Jul 2008 18:47:24 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash. Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s  Murray cited flawed poll, repeated GOP claim that &#x22;the public has grown more patient on Iraq&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200709230002</link>
<description>In a
&#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;
article, Shailagh Murray wrote: &#x22;GOP Senate offices circulated the
results of a Gallup poll released this week that showed 54 percent of
those surveyed think [Gen. David] Petraeus&#x27;s plan for removing troops
is the right pace, or even too quick.&#x22; However, this poll question did not explain to respondents how many troops Petraeus&#x27; plan called for removing or over what period
 of time this withdrawal would take place. Other polling shows that when respondents are told specifically what Petraeus recommended, the results are dramatically different.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200709230002</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:13:44 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash. Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Murray wrote that Petraeus will argue against &#x22;precipitous U.S. withdrawal&#x22; -- but who is arguing for it?</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200708310005</link>
<description>&#x3C;em&#x3E;The&#x3C;/em&#x3E; &#x3C;em&#x3E;Washington Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x3C;em&#x3E; &#x3C;/em&#x3E;wrote that Gen. David
Petraeus &#x22;is expected to report to Congress next month that there are
some signs of progress in Iraq
and that a precipitous U.S.
withdrawal could be disastrous.&#x22; But Murray
gave no
indication that the term &#x22;precipitous withdrawal&#x22; is used by
Republicans to attack Iraq
withdrawal plans, nor did she cite a single lawmaker who has called for a
&#x22;precipitous U.S.
withdrawal&#x22; from Iraq.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200708310005</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:19:54 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x3C;em&#x3E;Wash.  Post&#x3C;/em&#x3E;&#x27;s Murray: GOP won&#x27;t support Iraq  withdrawal because &#x22;[t]hey&#x27;re just not willing to do that to the  military&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200707180005</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200707180005</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:57:14 EST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>