In reply to:

How does this explain the other inconsistency? Namely (if Quirinius was "in charge" at the time of this census) why did Luke assert this census was conducted "in the days of Herod, King of Judea?"

1) The dates simply do not work out, and....
2) Quirinius would not have been called the one "in charge" if Herod still ruled Judea.

Curt

Luke1:5 It happened in the days of Herod, King of Judea, that there was a high priest named Zechariah, from the course of Abijah. And his wife was from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. Now they were both just in the presence of God, walking as blameless people in all the precepts and ritual acts of Yahweh. And there was no child for them, because Elisabeth was barren, and both of them were advanced in their days.

Having indicated a purpose to write his account in chronological order, the author sets the stage for the earliest scenes in the book, linking the events not only to one another but also to common secular history, such as might likely be known by his reader.

Herod the king was otherwise known as "Herod the Great." The author places the scene in the times of Herod, which ended with his death in about 4 BCE, having become King in 39 BCE. After being appointed to power, Herod married into the priestly family and had his chief opponent executed. Herod had cities built in honor of Julius Caesar's successor, Octavian (who was renamed Caesar Augustus). Augustus in turn proclaimed Herod his friend and expanded Herod's sphere of influence.

But Herod was ruthless, even murdering his wife when he suspected her of treachery. As the temple in Jerusalem was being reconstructed under his rule, Herod ordered a golden eagle placed there -- a symbol of Rome. When the Jewish people resisted, he ordered some of them executed. Near the end of his rule, he appears to have gone mad, ordering even his sons executed. Among the days of Herod were dark times for the Jewish people, and the reader was expected to recall those times.