Comments on: UPDATE IV: A National Reviewnik Thinks He’s "Contrarian"

By: Kevin Williamson

Kevin Williamson — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 23:23:53 +0000

Okay, last observation: “ . . . his sharing that horrible habit common among the Republican establishment of never admitting . . .” I am not a Republican, which would make it hard to be a member of the Republican establishment.

“Granted, it’s a prickly post, but Mr. Williamson can understand, surely, why writers like myself get a tad testy?” Yes, indeed, I can understand why.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 14:02:55 +0000

“substantiation of your position that Mr. Williamson is never a neoconservative?” Aw come on Mrs. Mercer- I didn’t say that he is “never a neoconservative” I said that I screened his archives which only go back four and a half months. From reading various articles of his posting, I didn’t find the normal neoconservative view. By that, I only inferred that I leaned toward the possibility that he wasn’t. My statement of his somewhat grudging acceptance of Ron Paul was only meant to reflect that he did not show animosity toward Ron Paul, whereas a neoconservative would. However, the link is “http://www.nationalreview.com/exchequer/231027/ten-things-you-should-know-about-rand-paul” Truth is, I still don’t know what political stripes he wears.
“his sharing that horrible habit common among the Republican establishment of never admitting to being Johnny-come-latelies on Iraq, Bush, economy, QE, etc.” With only 4.5 months worth of articles to scan, I have no idea how long he has been writing, He may not have anything in print in regard to Bush and the Middle East. I still say that it is good to see at least one writer that agrees with you in regard to the economy. Incidentally, I did mention “sense of humor” too.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 03:28:54 +0000

In reading Mr. Williamson’s article and a scan of the archives, which only go back to June that I was able to access, I did notice that though he takes a different side than Ron Paul in the matter of the war between the United States and the Confederate States government and other unmentioned criticisms he does give support (85%) to him. An important point since it is Ron Paul vs. the Neoconservative and if he was a neo! he would trash Ron Paul. Mr. Williamson doesn’t appear to give the neoconservatives support and seems to have a better sense of humor than it is possible for a neoconservative to possess. The important thing is that, other people are beginning to say the same things you have.

By: Mike Marks

Mike Marks — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 02:31:57 +0000

Now this could get interesting!

By: Kevin Williamson

Kevin Williamson — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 22:38:20 +0000

Also, it’s not like I supported the stimulus (the Bush stimulus or the Obama stimuli), or general Republican fiscal shenanigans, etc., so I’m not entirely sure how I’m a decade late and a trillion bucks short.

And a “neocon” tag — on me? Have you ever read a word I’ve written?

By: Kevin Williamson

Kevin Williamson — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 22:32:31 +0000

Austrian economics? I think I’ve heard of that.

By: Mike Marks

Mike Marks — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:03:13 +0000

If my memory serves me correctly didn’t Paul Volker head of the fed during the Reagan years raise interest rates to encourage savings, investment, and fight inflation? This was done in parallel with the Reagan tax cuts. Unfortunately Reagan was unable to get Congress to reduce spending.

I understand your frustration that Kevin D. Williamson would now see the light and call himself a contrarian. It seems like common wisdom (at least among the Austrian economic community) and its close friend common sense are not so common anymore.

One of the interesting ironies of the unbridled free market is the order that results, assuming a civil society, from a seemingly chatoic process. Clearly, decisions made by knowledgeable individuals distributed throughout the economy (on the spot, if you will) result in a much more orderly economy than one controlled by a centralized arbitray bureaucracy. The millions of intricate free simultaneous transactions results in an unbeatable economic system. In the end it does a much better job of separating the wheat from the chaff than a slow hulking bureaucracy.