Hi ,

If you had not used this phrase, I might have agreed with the nothing personal statement.

[quote="Alexander D. Mitchell IV"]
OH FOR THE LOVE OF G*D@MN FREAKING MOTHER OF ALL----

AS per the caption in Pennsy Power page 58 which I was trying to recalled clearly enough for you to know what I was talking about even though I had errors in it, "Business was dull across the U.S.A. in 1923, so someone hit on the idea of snappy publicity when Southern Pacific's order of 50 2-10-2 types were shipped westward. The train was decked out in banners proclaiming her the "Prosperity Special" and throngs gathered t watch her pass. - Above, Preparing to leave Baldwin's Plant, and below, half of the order gets a list up the curve with six Pennsy Locomotives." Of course, the curve is PRR's Horseshoe Curve.

The caption (and photos) are in a book with a 1962 copyright.

I recall Mom warning me never to condemn someone unless you have never made an error and yet here you are with errors.

I think you have an apology to make to the entire board for using unbecoming language.

AS for my accuracy, have you never made an error trying to recall something?

Sorry you were disturbed. To prevent it in the future (since I might inject errors), may I suggest you not read my posts?

Doug vV

Actually, at best I only started one by presenting the notion that there is debate over the true effectiveness and results of the "New Deal" versus pre-WW2 militarization. I'm not about to wallow into that murky and politically-contentious pig-wallow to wrestle with those pigs. ("After a while you realize the pigs enjoy it...")

The problem is that historians and political activists have chosen, for reasons typically driven by political bias and agenda, to selectively edit and present history so as to fit, explain, and support their biases and prejudices, be they covert or subconscious. This is how we can have one group presenting the settlement of North America as "manifest destiny" and the "pursuit of religious and economic liberty" while another can present the same chain of events as "genocide by foreign invaders." And, unfortunately, some of my day-to-day work involves having to deal with such "revisionist history" and having to edit out prejudices in such writing. And one only has to track political discussions online for some time, and do some actual research, to witness before his eyes a falsehood mutate into a widely-spouted (albeit still false) "statistic" affecting political discourse and even legislation (two stellar examples of late: "women earn 72 cents to the dollar that men make for the same work," and "one in five women are raped".)

We have modest forms of this in railroad history as well, ranging from debates as to why railroads dieselized or faced financial difficulty, whether railroads should electrify (or should have), whether passenger trains were/are necessary or not in 21st century North America, down to even the fairly trivial debate (in the global perspective) of whether the PRR T1, UP Big Boy, Alco Century series, and/or other such locos were a success or failure.

I'll concede that I "flew off the handle," but that was the third time in one day I've had to address, and correct, a falsehood being presented in support of a political view. Indeed, that post itself was a stunning example of how hard people are willing to reach and distort, even if by mistaken memory, to support their agendas. And--irony alert-- it came up in a topic that had drifted into discussing "revisionist history" itself. I was pounding my head on the desktop and growling "No, no, NO, NO, NO!!!!!"

The worst part of it all is that there are studies out there that purport that people, when presented with firm factual evidence that debunks a belief on a contentious issue, instead of re-evaluating their positions on said topic, re-double their efforts to maintain their beliefs in spite of the contrary evidence just presented. And why did I say "purport"? Because I went back and checked the studies I could find, and for whatever reason they focused almost exclusively (in the cases I found) on beliefs stereotypically held by "conservatives" to the exclusion of beliefs held by "liberals/progressives." (If you'd like to see an example of this in railroad history, try talking to someone convinced that "the National City Lines conspiracy is the only reason we don't have trolleys in all our cities today!")

So let me go ahead and issue the classic apology routinely issued by politicians: "I am deeply and humbly sorry if anyone has taken offense with the words I had chosen.... I hope that we can all learn from the events that have transpired, and move forward from this point to make a better, healthier Railway Preservation News and planet for all! Thank you, and may the deity of your choosing, should you have one, bless or otherwise confer favor upon the country, planet, or other entity of your choosing!"