Yesterday, the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd won the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary. Dowd wrote incoherent columns that rode the incredibly tiresome Clinton impeachment for all it was worth all year. Her writing is bad, her lack of interesting thoughts is profound, and the level of vitriol in her columns is downright disturbing. If the Pulitzer Prizes were awarded for the writing which best typifies the American media, then truly Dowd would have been deserving, but for an award that professes to document “intellectual and artistic excellence,” this is a sham.