Althouse unnamed Calculated Risk Ben Smith: Political News and Analysis From our report on today's Pulitzer Prize announcement: Edward Snowden didn’t win a Pulitzer on Monday, but he might as well have. In a move certain to be interpreted as a vindication of the former government contractor’s efforts, the Pulitzer Prize Board on Monday awarded The Guardian US and The Washington Post its coveted Public Service award for reporting on the National Security Agency’s domestic surveillance practices. The award was given for the “revelation of widespread secret surveillance by the National Security Agency, marked by authoritative and insightful reports that helped the public understand how the disclosures fit into the larger framework of national security,” the committee said in its release. Sig Gissler, the Pulitzer Prize administrator, announced the winners at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism in New York. Snowden immediately declared the decision “a vindication.” “There are times when a nominee is bigger than a prize.
The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan Wonkette Slog | The Stranger, Seattle's Only Newspaper Slog tipper Tea Lopez says she was maced by a man shouting transphobic slurs, including "tranny" and "bitch" at about 11 p.m. last night, as she walked to a bus stop with her friend, who is transgender. According to Lopez and the subsequent police report filed by Officer Edward Medlock, a gray-silver SUV pulled up and stopped suddenly in front of them as they stood waiting to cross the intersection of Bellevue Avenue and East Pine Street. A man jumped out of the car and ran up to them. "He asked if we like mace, and then he maced us," Lopez says, though she and her friend turned away swiftly enough that most of the spray landed on their jackets and bags. She heard him say something in Spanish, then remembers hearing the word "tranny" and something like "You stupid bitches like mace" while she was trying to avoid getting hit. The man quickly got back into the backseat of the vehicle and it sped off.
FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right Kevin Drum The Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, in which conservatives will argue that the text of Obamacare limits federal subsidies only to people who buy insurance from state-run exchanges, not from the federal exchange. Roughly speaking, there are two prongs of the conservative argument: The law contains text that explicitly limits subsidies to state-run exchanges. Democrats may not have intended this, but they screwed up in the rush to get the bill passed. That's too bad for them, but the law is the law. was meant as an incentive for states to run their own exchanges rather than punting the job to the feds. The argument over #1 revolves around textual interpretation of the statute as a whole, as well as previous Supreme Court precedent that provides federal agencies with broad latitude in how they implement regulations. But the recollections of journalists aren't really very germane to a Supreme Court case.
MyDD :: Direct Democracy for People-Powered Politics