Last night I posted about an odd article that ran on The Hill web site yesterday. I stand by my critique of the story, but want to apologize for my off-the-cuff theorizing about its origins.
Rather than stopping with my reaction to the article, I went on to play a connect-the-dots game to suggest that the story might have been pitched by Mary Anne Marsh on behalf of the DSCC. That certainly wasn't fair to Marsh, or to the DSCC (and its executive director Guy Cecil), or to the Hill journalist Michael O'Brien.
Kind of ironic, that I should make baseless insinuations in my post complaining about baseless insinuations. No, not ironic, what's the word I'm looking for... moronic maybe?
This is at least the second time recently I've done this -- a couple weeks back I spun my theory about who might be behind the mystery million-dollar Mitt Romney contribution. I was proved wrong, but frankly whether I was right or not, I don't think I should have written it.
So I don't think I can blame my earthquake-rattled brain. I'll have to try to check myself before I continue to wreck myself (and others).
I do not believe Mary Anne Marsh did anything other than respond to reporters' questions with her honest, unbiased observations. I apologize for suggesting otherwise.