posted
This Sunday, The New York Times will have an article regarding a Coast to Coast Amtrak journey. While The Times, along with most other nationally circulated publications, more aggressively protects their copyrighted content, there might still be a "knothole" in the paywall (hey, I pay 'em $1200 a year for that "thump on my porch", there'd better be for me).
Fair Use:
TELL YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS that you plan to cross the United States by train, and their reactions will range from amusement at your spellbinding eccentricity to naked horror that they, through some fatal social miscalculation, have become acquainted with a person who would plan to cross the United States by train. Depending how you slice it — time or money — there are either 61 or 960 immediate reasons not to travel by Amtrak trains from New York City to Los Angeles. Those are the extra hours and dollars, respectively, that you might reasonably expect to forfeit if you forgo a six-hour $129 nonstop flight and opt instead for an Amtrak sleeper car. Covering the interjacent 2,448.8 miles can easily consume some 67 hours for a mind-boggling $1,089.
All told, it appears the freelance writer "did it for the experience" but is not about to become a "rabid railfan".
palmland Member # 4344
posted
Well, GBN, I enjoyed that article so much I took them up on their offer of a $52 annual digital subscription. In my neck of the woods, my print WSJ arrives late afternoon or next day, so I have surprised myself by preferring the digital version on my iPad. Something about an old dog and new tricks.
In order to avoid indigestion, I'll skip their editorial page but I do enjoy their travel section and perhaps cooking and some business and feature articles.
yukon11 Member # 2997
posted
I loved the article. The quintessential experience on an Amtrak LD train and in an Amtrak roomette.
Richard
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
Well Mr. Palmland, welcome to "my rag" of some 70 years standing. For Sunday Dinner, both my Sister and I had to select an article from the paper - no sports - and recite to my Mother and Father to their satisfaction.
So far as the Times columnists, even being your presumed conservative, I would not dismiss out of hand David Brooks, but I realize, and respect, that ones such as Michelle Goldberg and Nicholas Kristoff will be too lefty, as they are for me.
Finally, if I could ever learn to read a paper on line, looks like I could save myself some "heap big wampum". On line is limited to "tying up" at the likes of Marion IL and Macon GA. Funny how the Breakfast Room TV at Express or Hampton is always tuned to F**. One time, I was the only one there. I found the remote, and KLIK.
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
So much for a "neutral to positive" article. Now to one that, simply, is "out and out" negative:
We were booking my travel arrangements to get me to and from the Detroit Auto Show back in January, and someone—I think it was Raphael Orlove—started looking up Amtrak tickets, just to compare them against flights.
Thanks to some strange streak of self-abasement, I thought this was a great idea. Let’s see what taking a train is like! It’ll be an adventure! This will be a fascinating!
I now know that, unless “fascinating” has very recently changed meanings to be a catch-all word for “long, dreary, grim, and depressing,” I couldn’t have been more wrong.
"We report, you decide".
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Well Mr. Palmland, welcome to "my rag" of some 70 years standing.
I also should add Bret Stephens to the columnists you should review:
posted