Don Phillips' writing in the November 2008 Trains issue

[Kathi Kube]

I just PM'd you with the emails notifying me of the deletions.

Got it. Please see your reply.

I disagree that it was necessarily inclusive. I think his word choice was vague, but very open to interpretation depending on one's views.

Phillips does tend to lean left in his writing, but I haven't experienced all he has in life, so I don't feel qualified to tell him how he should or shouldn't feel or write. I agree with him sometimes, other times I don't. Just like anyone else. But I always learn something from him.

Further, the purpose of a column — any column — is to generate discussion. Which brings me to your next point.

If it's in the magazine, yes. Absolutely, positively it's open for discussion. One caution/warning: Keep it to discussing the column, not politics in general. That, I'm sure will be yanked. But by all means talk about anything in the magazine whether you agree or not. We can take it, and love to hear/see what people think of what we're doing.

Thanks for helping me clear this all up. BTW, has anyone looked at Phillips' interview with Matt Van Hattem on TrainsTube yet? I haven't, but I've heard great things about it. Regardless of what you think of Don's politics, he's really a great guy. I hope you'll be able to see more of his personality there.

Take care, guys!
Kathi

[sanvtoman]

 As a 30+ year reader of Trains I have always liked his colums for the most part. I remember when John Kneiling was writing Phillips seemed to be more realistic in his point of view. He didnt have as much of a anti labor union slant so I liked him better.

[trainfan1221]

I haven't seen it yet, I know when things get heated politically they usually will intervene.  I know we need to support Amtrak, but it's a heated topic I'm sure so I'll just say that no matter how it's done, we are better off with a good national rail passenger system than without.  I've had my troubles with them, but certainly have used them enough.  When I take a longer trip and get asked why I don't fly, knowing me I can usually just say to the person What do you think?

[Modelcar]

.....I look forward to seeing the ariticle.  Maybe a bit more money spent on some passenger rail would please quite a few of us.  I'm sure not all....

We each can speak for ourselves if we do so in the proper way.

[greyhounds]

Hmmm. I'm puzzled. Primarily, I'm puzzled to know who deleted the earlier threads and their reasoning. That said, I can see why you might disagree with Phillips — people do, and that's one of the great things about our country: We can disagree with one another.

I'm also puzzled, though, about why you think he made up facts. He wrote, "When the word went out that Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware was to be the Democratic vice presidential candidate, an immediate shout of praise arose from people who love trains." He didn't say all people who love trains rejoiced, just that an unknown number of people who love trains were very happy. And that's true. More importantly, though, Phillips cautioned readers not to jump to conclusions and believe that just because Biden rides and likes trains that our world will change and railroads will be swimming in financial and political good times. That's a way over-simplification that unfortunately is very prevalent in some railfans' thoughts. Not all. Just some. And that's who Phillips is addressing.

As for the other concerns about censoring, wondering if we have something to hide, and assuming where correspondence with the magazine will end up, I can't assure you strongly enough that the editorial staff has nothing to hide and we absolutely do care what you and all of our readers think. Please don't think for a moment that we don't.

Again, I'm not sure who censored the earlier messages or why. But I'll talk with Bergie when I get a chance and ask him about the process. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to email or write us whenever you want. We care and we're listening.

Kathi Kube
Managing editor

I just PM'd you with the emails notifying me of the deletions.

The quote about people who love trains shouting praise for Senator Biden is inclusive.  It does not say "some people who love trains" or even "many people who love trains".  It says people who love trains shouted praise.  I would guess that Phillips just can't imagine anyone who "loves trains" not wanting the government to a appropriate large sums of money for anything on steel rails.  So he wrote an inclusive statement that unforetunately, and wrongly, included me.  That's what I meant by him being "Unfactual".

Phillips does a generally politically oriented column and he brings to it a left of center view.  That's fine.  He can write and you can publish what you want.

But if it's in your magazine shouldn't we be able to discuss what he writes here?

 

[Kathi Kube]

Hmmm. I'm puzzled. Primarily, I'm puzzled to know who deleted the earlier threads and their reasoning. That said, I can see why you might disagree with Phillips — people do, and that's one of the great things about our country: We can disagree with one another.

I'm also puzzled, though, about why you think he made up facts. He wrote, "When the word went out that Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware was to be the Democratic vice presidential candidate, an immediate shout of praise arose from people who love trains." He didn't say all people who love trains rejoiced, just that an unknown number of people who love trains were very happy. And that's true. More importantly, though, Phillips cautioned readers not to jump to conclusions and believe that just because Biden rides and likes trains that our world will change and railroads will be swimming in financial and political good times. That's a way over-simplification that unfortunately is very prevalent in some railfans' thoughts. Not all. Just some. And that's who Phillips is addressing.

As for the other concerns about censoring, wondering if we have something to hide, and assuming where correspondence with the magazine will end up, I can't assure you strongly enough that the editorial staff has nothing to hide and we absolutely do care what you and all of our readers think. Please don't think for a moment that we don't.

Again, I'm not sure who censored the earlier messages or why. But I'll talk with Bergie when I get a chance and ask him about the process. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to email or write us whenever you want. We care and we're listening.

Kathi Kube
Managing editor

[Mookie]

Once again, I got up out of my uncomfortable puter chair and hunted down MY Trains magazine from the Driver. 

My opinion is that you are probably taking a political approach, whereas I found no such feeling in the article.  I always enjoy his column and this one is no different.  He is stating facts as they are and cautioning people to not get their hopes up as a change in the big office may not mean a change in the situation with Amtrak. 

There are differences between D & R and to me, he is pointing out some those differences.  No more, no less.

Mook

[Soo 6604]

I haven't got my issue yet.

Read your other post, then tried finding it. Wonder how long before the censors delete this one?

I take it your not supposed to confront the article from the guy. Wonder if they have something to hide? Do they risk hurting his feelings or offending someone thats been loyal to TRAINS for 45 years? I'd say write to the magazine but I think we know where that end up.

[greyhounds]

I am going to try this again.  My first two post were deleted by a moderator.

Mr. Phillips starts his column by making a claim that people who love trains were greatly pleased by a recent event.  Well, I certainly love trains, and I've subscribed to Trains Magazine for around 45 years now.

But I was not greatly pleased by what happened.  In fact, I was downright displeased.

If Phillips wants to express his opinions that's his right.  But I don't not want him grouping me in with others who think differently than myself.   For Phillips to do so was "unfactual".  He can have his own opinions, but not his own facts.