Just saw an NY Times report that Baucus will not seek reelection."Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin..."Perhaps?

The irony here is so thick you can cut it with a knife! Baucus' irritation with Sebelius is pathetic, because his ill-defined, train-wrecked-by-design law is turning out to be, well, a trainwreck. Apparently she needs to get with the program so he can go back to looking good.

Those who have read C.S. Lewis's That Hideous Strength will see a terrifying likeness to the character of Ms. Hardcastle!

My goodness: this does sound like a good idea. After all, the president has engaged former president Clinton's services before. And Big Dog Clinton would leave his scent on the proceedings, which would at least help throw the current president's incompetence/collectivist-utopianism into sharp relief.

With tongue firmly in cheek: Mr. Douthat and Miz Fluke in close proximity? Wouldn't that be kinda like mixing matter and anti-matter? Might be explosive, but I would also like to see that (from a safe distance, of course...)

Garrett, a question: which school of economics has dominated the education of the students you mentioned? Keynesian? (It sure wasn't the Austrian school, from the sound of it...)

Oh, great. Can't wait until we start having the "daily hate..."What's that? Oh, that's right, Chris Matthews already leads that on MSNBC, doesn't he?

John Grant said:

I feel as if I am trapped in a soap opera dominated by hormonally driven teenagers.

Never mind this bunch at CIA/FBI/Pentagon; what about the bunch in the White House?  I had so hoped for the restoration of grown-up's to the White House, but apparently enough of the conservative electorate decided to "sit this one out" that we're just not going to have that, barring impeachment or further impedimenta...

Indeed:  yet more evidence that we are dealing with ends-justifies-the-means thinking which is truly chilling.  The willingness to swap the sanctity of a marriage for "some greater political good" is a surface feature which says a great deal about the size of the iceberg underneath...

For what it's worth, may I recommend Niall Ferguson's The Ascent of Money?  If your niece doesn't like to read, then the corresponding video is either available on DVD or may still be online at PBS.  Don't let the PBS hosting turn you off; Ferguson, for all his faults, helps provide a useful perspective on economic history.  The latter portions are especially helpful to provide a view of the genesis of the housing crisis.  Plus, Ferguson was willing to take on Paul Krugman's filthy Keynesian grandstanding publicly, which instantly got my attention.

Ferguson was the first one who got some of my time when things started going bad at the end of '08, I'm ashamed to admit.  After that, came Econtalk, and they have one podcast a week, so recommend them, too.  Econtalk is an education in phenomena like rent-seeking and moral hazards, which also help tell the sad story which led to the latest economic mess, and (gasp!) why bailouts and Keynesian policies are such a bad idea.

Finally:  Russ Roberts of Econtalk has a Youtube series called Numbers Game, and has also worked on a channel there called Econ Stories.

Two thoughts:

1. We are witness to original sin working its way out in the lives of our fellow Americans; indeed, none of us escapes its curse, except through the intervention of God himself (cf. Romans 3.23, Romans 5.8, for starters.)  This is a part of this struggle, I think, and if you're a Christian, then you're under orders to pray for our leaders.  I personally find this impossible unless God helps me to do it.  For more on this, see Laura Ingraham's citation of an essay by Eric Metaxas.
2. There's a part of me that wants to quote Churchill's absolutely stunning WWII speeches also.  (This one is one of his best, I think; the full text of that 1941 address is here!)   It's grievous to see more and more of our fellow Americans writhing beneath statism's yoke, and yes, we must draw our swords in this cause, never to let them fall till life is gone or victory is won...

I buy your argument that Goldwater laid the foundation for a later Reagan victory. But I am struggling to see how the present corresponds to that past election, because Romney just isn't very "Goldwater-esque..." And it could also be a caffeine deficit (up late last night for some reason...)

Indeed.  I can't help but think that part of this picture includes something like what Roman Catholics call the principle of subsidiarity.  Some Protestant thinkers have something similar, called sphere sovereignty.  I know I must make the Good News a feature of conversation, for that's of first importance.  But how it touches on the world around us:  that's where subsidiarity and the like have to come in, right?

Will "divided government" work over the next four years? Especially with an executive who really doesn't care about our Constitution? Please tell me that it can still work...

Oh, wonderful post! Thank you! You're absolutely right about the tiny likelihood that Mr. Obama will heed such counsel. He is absolutely the most utopian of materialists on the national scene, and he will most likely continue down that path.

I think that one of the reasons the Obama administration has aroused such anger is because of the ends-justifies-the-means, utopian-idealism-made-reality kinds of thinking enshrined in their policies.  Operation Fast and Furious comes to mind as an example of such a policy.  Yes, there were superficially similar efforts under Bush 43.  Don't take this to mean that I thought those were a good idea, either.  Nonetheless, isn't it a mistake to equate the two?

Many of us come from a political and social philosophy similar to (but not always identical in every regard) that of Roger Williams, the founder of Providence Plantation, who called the violation of the conscience "rape of the soul."  What else do you call the HHS mandate which forces Christians to violate their consciences?

I don't hate Barack Obama; I pray for him, and his cabinet.  But I do not agree with his materialist utopianism.  If the principles for which he has clearly and explicitly declared great affection are followed by the United States, then "government by, of, and for the people" will perish from the earth.