National Park Foundation: In the tank for Trump?

I've never given a dime to the National Park Foundation, knowing it's largely neoliberal capitalist greenwashing, and that it got worse at that during Dear Leader's celebration of the centennial of the National Park Service in 2016. 

But, reading its February newsletter, which came out last week?

Starts with notice about new CEO Jeff Reinbold, with link to a letter from him.

Next? 

Talks about Black History Month in the national parks.

Did it not read about Trump's January anti-DEI executive order, which was seen as scrubbing the Tuskegee Airmen, until the USAF reinstated the early Black pilots training video, followed by some MAGAts in Congress claiming that the USAF's original action was deliberate? Did they not

Beyond that, did it not think that Trump's January firing of probationary and seasonal NPS workers would affect Black history NPS sites?

Did it not even write about that at all? No, no and no.

Could not an electronic newsletter pushed out Feb. 19 have been edited to include that, even if started before that? Yes.

Look. The NPF takes money — sometimes shitloads of money, as I noted last year — from big neoliberal capitalist companies. If not in the tank for Trump, they're at least gunshy.

Texas progressives talk about the start of the Lege

Is ERCOT right to be worried about the Texas power grid? The Trib says many people claim that's overstated, in part based on new utility use accounting. OTOH, I think counting potential customers as well as actual ones, especially these data centers, is important.

The Texas vs New York reproductive service wars have heated up after a Collin County judge ordered New York doctor Margaret Carpenter to stop prescribing mifepristone etc to Texas resident patients.

Trump's tariffs will drive up beer prices if you buy it in cans not bottles. (That said, the craft breweries the author worries about most usually bottle, not can, don't they? And, she didn't mention beer kegs.)

SocraticGadfly takes a look at Russia-Ukraine issues of the last several days.

Can downtown Dallas be revived? The Monthly ponders that issue in a longform, without being as skeptical-critical of the likes of Ray Washburne as Jim Schutze was in his glory days.

Off the Kuff has the January campaign finance reports for US Senate and Congress.

Trump didn't actually let Eric Adams off the hook. Instead, the NYC mayor is dangling in a creative way.

The TikTok ban? Fueled by Israel, not China. 

Learn about the Office of Attending Physician, a concierge health service for Congresscritters, and maybe other gummint insiders, paid for by you and I, and right now, serving as enablers of Congressional dementia and general gerontocracy-itis.

Want to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget? Here's how.

As Musk/Trump attacks FEMA and climate science, the Houston Democracy Project asked why Republican At-Large Councilmember Twila Carter who attended Mattress Mack GOTV rally last October, is Chair of Council Committee that deals with these issues.  

Space City Weather sings the praises of a fully operational and un-privatized National Weather Service.

 Deceleration criticizes how Texas universities responded to the 2023 anti-DEI law. 

The Dallas Observer has what you need to know about Dan Patrick and dick pics.  

Your Local Epidemiologist explains what "indirect costs" are in NIH grants.  

Lone Star Left reviews House committee assignments.

Paid subreddits? More Reddit monetization?

Barf me with this news.

Now, the paid subreddits — as of this time! — would only be new ones. Current ones wouldn't be affected.

But, more ads in comment flow? Barf. I block those companies, but don't know if they can stay blocked. And, AFAIK, there's no Reddit version of Facebook Purity on the horizon.

Even worse than those two, which like the first one wouldn't bother me, but will surely lead to the increased enshittification of Reddit?

Some Reddit semi-parallel to Facebook Marketplace.

Also barf me? Per the disclosure tag at the end of the story? Advance Publications, wrecker of newspapers, and owner of story site Ars Technica, is the biggest Reddit shareholder.

Syrian chemical weapons anti-West whistleblower has new book

The lead whistleblower from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, who several years ago said OPCW's claims that all the chemical weapons attacks in Syria were by Assad's government was a mix of lies, now has a book out, "The Syria Scam: An insider look into Chemical Weapons, Geopolitics and the Fog of War." The Dissident reviews the basics; the piece isn't bad, other than the fail of not mentioning the propagandists of the White Helmets.

Ian Henderson was the "Inspector A" on the ground, noting problems with both Khan Shaykhun (also Khan Sheikhoun and other variants) and Douma. That's where, per Bob Fisk and others the White Helmets are believed by many to have planted chlorine gas cylinders. 

Big takeaways? 

Henderson says there was a chemical weapons attack at Khan Shaykhun. And, it may well have been by Assad. But, the sites the US bombed in retaliation weren't involved in chemical weapons manufacture or delivery.

I wrote at the time about Hersh's reporting, which The Dissident also links. I noted that, more than the US or UK, Turkey and President Erdogan, had the most to gain from what the OPCW finally released. A few months earlier, I wrote about how easy sarin is to produce;

Douma?

• No sarin;
• Insufficient evidence of chlorine;
• Symptoms didn't match chlorine gassing;
• Cylinders more likely placed by hand than air-delivered.

This, as noted above, is where many allege the White Helmets were involved. I wrote about Western weaponization of the White Helmets here. Related? If barrel bombs were used there, and they're allegedly terror weapons? Well, the US and Israel used them before that.

Henderson and co-inspector B, Brendad Wheelan, believe the final report on Douma was sexed up by the US, UK, or both. 

Here's Robert Fisk on Douma, years ago.

Using Applicant Pro

You would think that in 2025, a resume-extraction site for an internet browser could do better than this, but I guess not.

I had a week or two ago applied to a company that, rather than emailing resumes and cover letters, has you upload a resume to Applicant Pro. My resumes are formatted with a quasi-two column header for each job, with title and employer flush left and dates flush right.

The boss of the company emailed me about interview times and said they needed more information, too.

Applicant Pro had a job from a decade ago listed as my top job. 

Then, when I fixed that, it asked the old contact/no question, and I of course said no.

OK, getting a bit more irked.

Then, it asked the old "references" question, and it's a general protocol of mine not to supply them until after initial interview. The company's not that big, but, it's a newspaper company with 4-5 editorial staff and this is the ME's position. They'll have multiple candidates and won't be hiring until a second round of interviews. They don't need references right away.

And, two weeks since that initial interview, crickets, including not even a follow-up question about references.

What's up with this required renter's insurance?

When I job-hunt, one of the first things I do before applying to a position is, if the job listing includes salary range, is go to Best Places' cost-of-living comparison webpage. The free version is basic, and for homeowners not renters. But, it still gives me a starting point.

If the cost of living difference for a homeowner isn't a killer, I can then go to Apartments.com or similar and check prices out.

Recently, at least twice if not three times in the past several months, when clicking on particular apartments in the town or small city that interested me, I've seen, on the financials, after rent costs, security deposit etc., "renter's insurance required." 

Fuck that.

Never had it required before.

Is this a growing trend?