Generated with @grok imagine
When We emerge from the cave,
We see the Sun for the first time 🌞
Like Plato’s allegory of the Cave,
We’ve been in the shadows too long,
Only seeing blurry Reflections of the Truth
Imaged on the dark, damp, cold cave walls.
Half of my family are hypnotized by the likes of
@nytimes @wapo @latimes @MSNOWNews (BTW, as a woman with Progressive Multiple Sclerosis, you really picked the wrong name)
@NPR, oh yes and @AP
Liberal news manna. I’m allergic or maybe I just shook off the fantasy of an Idyllic Society.
07.10.2011 Vermont leftists’ hysterical protests of nuclear power. Media fan the flames. Science ignored.
Solar panels, windmills could never sustain Vermonters’
Power needs.
Idyllica
The Utopian paradise,
A Theme Park for adults,
Everything for you,
Oz-like.
Then I read Meredith's post about a judge ruling from the heart so to speak. (Meredith is an expert in Nuclear Power and safety) Judge didn’t listen, or was influenced by an unknown power.
Sure to get him invites to great champagne parties,
his grandchildren will write of his epic decision.
Meanwhile,
in Vermont,
in the Jungle,
plant employees are preparing to be laid off,
find new places to live,
stores that sell them things are making new plans,
the school wondering how to pay their bills when all the taxpayers move out,
leaving a ghost town.
Unsuspecting rate payers,
by candle power,
will peruse their bill and accuse each other
of leaving something running,
when actually it was just the more expensive power.
The legal field should be stunned,
beware,
legislating from the bench makes all lawyers squirm,
a thrill and concern
someday it may go against them.
Read Meredith's article and if you get all happy about shutting down a nuke,
well,
there is more to the story,
and Meredith knows it.
Thank you Meredith,
(Vermont shut down the Nuclear Power Plant)
Bardach’s Eightfold Path (policy analysis framework):
1. Define the problem
2. Assemble evidence
3. Construct alternatives
4. Select criteria
5. Project outcomes
6. Confront trade-offs
7. Decide
8. Tell your story
Addendum:
Giving credit: https://gspp.berkeley.edu/research-and-impact/faculty/eugene-bardach
Grok:
1. Define problem: Medicare denies coverage, classifying as non-medical; limits independence, worsens comorbidities (spasticity, bone loss, pressure injuries) in non-ambulatory users.
2. Assemble evidence: Peer-reviewed studies show benefits: ROM maintenance, spasticity reduction, bone density preservation, better bladder/bowel function, pressure relief, MRADLs independence (e.g., reaching, hygiene).
3. Construct alternatives: No change; legislative (separate CRT category); NCD reconsideration (reclassify as medical DME).
4. Select criteria: Beneficiary health/QoL/ethics (high weight); cost/admin feasibility.
5. Project outcomes: NCD change: medium-high benefit, potential cost-neutral via reduced hospitalizations; legislative: highest benefit but slow.
6. Confront trade-offs: NCD fastest/realistic; balances access vs. admin burden.
7. Decide: Pursue NCD reconsideration (2020 ITEM request pending/waitlisted as of 2026).
8. Tell story: Evidence supports primarily medical nature; coverage promotes independence, prevents complications.
Generated with @grok imagine If I could travel with a Time Machine I might pick a destination like the Woolworth lunch counter where it was a treat to have a bowl of chicken soup and a cherry coke. About 1967.
First, Grok imagined my destination…
