On Fireside Chats, Mark and Tevi think about think tanks. Tevi argues that think tanks have become too politicized. Do the think tanks that claim ideological diversity actually hew to a partisan line? They discuss the battle for the control of Cato, and Mark argues that the right has sought to discredit expertise. How much influence do funders have over what think tanks produce? They debate whether the liberal Center for American Progress has become merely a mouthpiece for the Obama administration and take a closer look at Cato’s claims of ideological independence.

On The Posner Show, Sarah speaks with Anthea about the controversy over Mona Eltahawy’s “Why Do They Hate Us?” piece in Foreign Policy, and whether her broad-brush approach, which provoked much criticism, could contribute to a more robust discussion of international women’s rights. Turning to the domestic “war on women,” Sarah wonders whether the term is politically useful, and argues that the fight over contraception coverage raises a much bigger issue—a long-term goal of redefining the First Amendment. While the Vatican investigates and “reforms” American nuns, Anthea contends that the American bishops are completely out of touch. Plus: Anthea lays out a harsh critique of Ross Douthat’s new book, Bad Religion.

Glenn and Tim talk about the problem of increasing inequality in the US, which is the subject of Tim’s new book, The Great Divergence. Tim and Glenn debate international comparisons of inequality between the US and other countries. Tim explains why some common explanations of American inequality—race, gender, and immigration—don’t hold water. He argues that education, skill-based technological change, and globalization play a much stronger role. Glenn asks about the role of unions—good for equality but, perhaps, not so good for productivity. Tim recommends a less antagonistic culture of labor-management relations as a possible antidote to rising inequality.

On Washington Squares, Michael talks to Daniel about politics and baseball. They begin by analyzing Obama’s varieties of coolness, and discussing whether Romney is underrated by the media. Daniel reviews Marco Rubio’s recent foreign policy speech and what it means for the veepstakes. Will Rubio be the Sarah Palin of 2012? Michael and Daniel next turn to the political writers’ pastime, baseball. They conclude by examining whether sports can elevate culture.

On Foreign Entanglements, Rob speaks with Charli, who critiques Foreign Policy‘s recent “Sex” issue. Rob wonders why they decided to publish an issue just on sex. They then discuss how Game of Thrones subverts the foreign policy theory known as realism and offers a chilling portrayal of torture. Is Cersei Lannister the least likeable character in the series? And how are George R.R. Martin’s racial depictions better than Tolkien’s? Finally, Charli and Rob consider how pop culture can affect the study of foreign relations.

This week on The DMZ: Matt responds to the swipe he took from Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin. Is it a new day for gay conservatives? Did Sen. Marco Rubio help his VP campaign with his foreign policy speech? Do Mitt Romney and the GOP face a pop culture gap with President Obama, and if so, are they able to fix it?

This week on The Glenn Show, the topic is political correctness. Amy and Glenn agree that it’s a problem, and Amy stresses its bad affects in the university. Glenn asks what’s wrong with ostracizing people who incite bigotry or hurt the feelings of others with their words. Amy illustrates her argument with the example of “food deserts.” Glenn’s concerns reach far beyond the college campus—he stresses that there’s PC on both left and right. Even if some professors are politically biased, won’t accurate research and data ultimately win out? And is political correctness the weapon of the weak or the intellectually lazy?

Peter and Conor kick things off by discussing President Obama’s management skills—they agree that Mitt Romney will make them an issue, but disagree about whether Romney’s experience as a management consultant has prepared him for the White House. Conor says it’s impossible to tell what President Romney’s foreign policy would be, whereas Peter argues that he’s always been “cautiously hawkish.” Peter makes the case against the Buffett Rule. And Conor explains how his “best of journalism” awards differ from the National Magazine Awards.

This week on The Glenn Show, John and Glenn talk about their personal and professional lives. Have professors abandoned engaging with the broader intellectual world? John announces his new position at Columbia University and Glenn explains why he so loves teaching at a place like Brown. John and Glenn make the case against political correctness in the classroom. John waxes eloquent about the joys and sorrows of fatherhood. Glenn relates his existential crisis in the wake of his wife’s recent death, and John gives him some sage advice.