Radley Balko issues an invigorating response to David Brooks’ recent paean to authoritarian conservatism. The really weird thing about the enthusiasm for big government’s "moral guard-rails" is that the period in which government was kept under control – in the 1990s – every social indicator improved. As Radley reminds us:
Seems to me that technology, relaxed public attitudes, and consumer choice have given Americans more lifestyle freedom over the last 15 years than we‚Äôve ever had before. Yet not only is our national moral fabric not unraveling, it appears to be as durable and fibrous as it’s ever been.
So why exactly do we need more moral guardrails from the government aimed at restricting behavior? … We handle our liberty just fine, thanks. The vast majority of Americans don’t need government-imposed ‘guardrails.’ Family, friends, churches, and other support networks more than suffice.
This used to be one of the benchmarks of conservatism. Now, it’s a minority view.
I have often chuckled at the titles that head conservative bestsellers these days (as a resident of liberal Ann Arbor, they’re usually lined up for me in the discount section of my bookstore). Nowhere has the decline of rational conservatism into rabid partisan rhetoric become more apparent. 
Terrorists? Done (Hannity). Death-lovers? Yep (Ponnuru). Treasonous? Absolutely (Coulter). Mentally disabled? Sure (Savage). And the ever popular, godless (all of the above). By equating liberalism with Nazi fascism, Jonah Goldberg has used the last and most desperate of all attack methods. In their attempts to incite hate (and sell books) these writers have created the closest thing to a parody of the conservative movement I could have imagined. 
The Dish 