Access to health insurance in the United States is one of the most hotly debated issues in the national discourse. Prior to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), 44 million Americans lacked health insurance, including many low-income nonelderly adults who did not fall within traditionally covered Medicaid eligibility groups, including pregnant women, disabled adults, and low-income children.1 Since the ACA went into effect in 2013, 11.9 million newly eligible people have gained coverage through Medicaid in states that chose to expand their programs.2 In addition to producing better health outcomes, Medicaid expansion has resulted in new enrollees having access to quality care without the threat of financial turmoil.
Still, opponents of the ACA desperately seek to roll back this progress. Since passing sweeping tax legislation, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) has made clear his desire to cut a wide range of critical programs in order to meet the tax bill's $1.5 trillion price tag—and in particular, cuts to Medicaid, which have long been a priority for Ryan.3 In order to pave the way for what are sure to be deep and devastating cuts to Medicaid, conservatives are recycling the same tired myths about this essential program. Recent research demonstrates the inaccuracy of these claims and highlights the significance of Medicaid coverage.
Myth: Medicaid coverage has little positive effect on enrollees' health.
Reality: Medicaid plays a critical role in providing enrollees with preventative care and improving health outcomes.
House Speaker Ryan and other conservative leaders often reference a study on a pre-ACA Medicaid expansion in Oregon to argue that Medicaid enrollees do not experience positive health outcomes. Among its wide range of findings, the study showed that Medicaid coverage "did increase use of health care services, raise rates of diabetes detection and management, lower rates of depression, and reduce financial strain." However, it failed to show improved physical health outcomes for expansion enrollees after two years.4 Using this single finding, conservatives have attempted to cast doubt on Medicaid's impact on health outcomes.
Although this study's design as a randomized controlled trial makes it an important example, its sample contained too few patients with the particular health conditions being analyzed—including high cholesterol and hypertension—to draw strong conclusions about Medicaid's health impact.5 Furthermore, the study only analyzed the impact of the first two years of Medicaid coverage; it may be the case that examining a longer time frame would find a greater improvement to health outcomes.
As the nation fights a deadly opioid epidemic, Medicaid expansion has served as a critical source of care for expansion adults—those who gained coverage under Medicaid expansion. Still, conservatives try to create the illusion of failure. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) recently released a report drawing a false correlation between Medicaid expansion and the opioid epidemic.8 In his analysis, Sen. Johnson argues that Medicaid expansion provided more people access to opioid prescriptions, thus leading to higher rates of addiction.
Medicaid has provided essential mental health and substance use disorder treatments to those most affected by the opioid epidemic. The Government Accountability Office released a report of four states that have expanded Medicaid, finding that between 20 percent and 34 percent of expansion adults utilized some form of behavioral health services in 2014.11 Officials in these states also reported greater access to care and increased use of medication-assisted treatment for substance abuse.12 The answer to fighting the opioid crisis is expanding access to high-quality, affordable care, not rolling it back.
Myth: Medicaid coverage increases enrollees' use of emergency services.
Reality: More research is required to determine the relationship between Medicaid expansion and utilization of emergency services.
Conservatives often point to the same aforementioned Oregon study to argue that Medicaid expansion leads to unnecessary reliance on emergency services. Among the study's other findings, researchers found that emergency department visits by Medicaid enrollees increased by 40 percent in the first 15 months of expansion.13 As a result, conservatives conclude that Medicaid coverage encourages potentially inappropriate use of expensive services.
However, there are contradictory findings on this issue. A study comparing Kentucky and Arkansas—two states that expanded Medicaid under the ACA—with Texas, a nonexpansion state, found that low-income adults in the expansion states were more likely to receive regular medical care and visit the emergency room less often.14 Still, the time frame since expansion is relatively short, and this presents an issue when evaluating the relationship between Medicaid coverage and utilization of emergency services. Newly insured individuals may initially utilize health services at a higher rate due to previously unmet needs for necessary care that they could not afford when they were uninsured. This higher need for health services could very well decrease over time as these preexisting health conditions are treated.
Myth: Medicaid enrollees have less access to care than patients with other forms of insurance.
Reality: The vast majority of Medicaid enrollees are able to find providers, and their access to care is substantially better than those without insurance.
House Speaker Ryan details his grand plan for slashing funding for Medicaid in "A Better Way," a conservative policy agenda released in 2016.17 One of his main arguments for cutting Medicaid is that program beneficiaries suffer from lack of access to care. Ryan argues that only a "portion" of physicians accept new Medicaid patients, referencing a 2009 study by the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission that found only 65 percent of physicians accepted new Medicaid patients.18 Ryan also notes that Medicaid patients face even more barriers to specialist care.
There is a wide range of evidence showing that Rep. Ryan's argument is overblown. While it is true that physicians' acceptance of Medicaid can be more limited than private insurance, few Medicaid patients are actually unable to find care. Newer research indicates that about 70 percent of physicians accept new Medicaid patients, compared with an acceptance rate of 85 percent for privately insured and Medicare patients.19 According to a report by the Kaiser Family Foundation, about 11 percent of new Medicaid enrollees reported difficulty in finding a physician, but fewer than 3 percent were unable to get an appointment.20 This compares with about 6 percent of privately insured patients reporting difficulty in finding a provider, with 2 percent unable to get an appointment.21 It is clear that, while Medicaid enrollees may face slightly worse access to care, the disparity between Medicaid patients and those with private insurance is not quite as extreme as House Speaker Ryan implies.
Finally, Ryan and other conservatives fail to recognize the real alternative for most low-income Medicaid enrollees: remaining uninsured. A Kaiser Family Foundation study found that 1 in 5 uninsured adults went without care due to cost in 2016.22 Furthermore, satisfaction with care among Medicaid enrollees is comparable to that of patients with private insurance, rated at 85 percent and 87 percent respectively; however, uninsured adults' satisfaction with care hovers at around 44 percent.23 Repeated studies have shown that uninsured individuals are less likely to receive preventative care and ultimately see worse health outcomes.
It is true that Medicaid could be improved: Reducing wait times, increasing access to specialists, and ensuring care in rural areas are important goals. However, cutting funding or pushing people out of the program are not solutions. More needs to be done to strengthen Medicaid and ensure access for those who need it.
Myth: Medicaid discourages individuals from working and traps them into poverty.
Reality: Medicaid coverage has been proven to reduce poverty and improve enrollees' overall financial stability.
Despite this evidence, the Trump administration is continuing to promote policies based on these outdated stereotypes about Medicaid and work. In early January, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that it would begin approving work requirements in Medicaid as part of state Medicaid waivers. Several states have already taken action to get Medicaid work requirements approved, and two states—Kentucky and Indiana—have already received federal approval.30 CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a recent statement: "Our policy guidance was in response to states that asked us for the flexibility they need to improve their programs and to help people in achieving greater well-being and self-sufficiency."31 Not only does Verma conflate self-sufficiency with the ability to work, but she also masks the true intention of this policy change—reducing access to Medicaid.
The problem is that most nonelderly adults enrolled in Medicaid who are able to work already do; they just lack access to coverage through their employers. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly 8 in 10 nonelderly adults who do not receive Social Security disability benefits and who are covered by Medicaid come from working families, with the majority working themselves.32 Many of the enrollees who do not work are caregivers; are in school; or are ill or have disabilities. A small portion of nonelderly Medicaid adults—about 7 percent—are not working due to an inability to find employment.33 There is no evidence that work requirements serve beneficiaries; however, the implementation of work requirements threatens access to Medicaid for millions of Americans.
Myth: Changing the funding structure of Medicaid to block grants or per capita caps would increase state flexibility and provide more certainty for state budgets.
Reality: Medicaid allows states to tailor their programs based on the needs of their residents, and efforts to change the funding structure translates to cutting benefits.
By relying on cherry-picked facts and misinterpreted data, conservatives push myths about Medicaid to justify their plans to cut this vital program. Last year's most recent attempt to repeal the ACA could have resulted in more than 32 million people losing insurance—including 19 million Medicaid enrollees.40 If they succeed, Republican efforts to sabotage and slash funding for Medicaid succeed would result in devastating outcomes for low-income Americans and the country at large.


text:
layout: page
title: Protector Industries Party
date: 2016-05-24
author: John Orozco
tags: weekly links, java
status: published
summary: Mauris a odio luctus, tincidunt tortor eget, maximus sem. Sed.
banner: images/banner/office-01.jpg
booking:
  startDate: 08/15/2018
  endDate: 08/16/2018
  ctyhocn: WDGOKHX
  groupCode: PIP
published: true
---
Nam porta in nisl quis gravida. Etiam pellentesque quis velit nec feugiat. Curabitur nec semper dui, at accumsan mi. Quisque leo tellus, volutpat ut eros in, molestie elementum dui. Maecenas urna felis, porttitor in diam id, consectetur mattis velit. Vestibulum egestas lorem eget lectus mollis dapibus. Aliquam pellentesque ut nisi sodales eleifend. Vestibulum non nisi quis nunc iaculis dictum non sit amet nulla. Aenean sed tincidunt magna, ac condimentum tellus.

* Nulla at purus eu eros ultricies viverra sed sit amet diam
* Quisque aliquam nisl in ex aliquam elementum
* Vestibulum maximus ante sit amet ipsum dapibus vulputate at sed purus
* Integer laoreet ex efficitur magna volutpat, sed semper nunc bibendum
* In et quam sit amet magna consequat commodo.

In justo sem, condimentum at leo quis, tristique porta tortor. Integer est tortor, elementum ac erat nec, rhoncus porttitor tellus. Fusce vitae ipsum sit amet turpis consectetur suscipit id at nibh. Mauris quis nulla maximus, ullamcorper sem egestas, pulvinar tellus. Nulla eu purus ac mi fermentum iaculis. Nulla facilisi. Sed lacinia convallis risus quis bibendum. In et gravida purus. Mauris neque leo, vestibulum vel suscipit tristique, pellentesque quis enim. Proin congue ligula urna. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos.
Etiam varius purus id turpis euismod, non malesuada lacus placerat. Praesent in congue arcu, sit amet congue dolor. Ut a nulla ullamcorper, lacinia diam non, rutrum nulla. Pellentesque cursus augue aliquam lectus dapibus, at porta turpis porta. Ut ac tempus ipsum. Suspendisse ac tristique augue, a scelerisque enim. Vivamus blandit erat eget finibus pretium. Donec rutrum vitae mauris sed rutrum. Ut mollis magna sit amet nisi rutrum vulputate. Vestibulum ut nibh pellentesque nulla eleifend ullamcorper a ut dui. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Front page - Fighting the U-boats - Allied Warship Commanders
Listing of officers
Commander finder
Allied Warship Commanders
Alvord Sydney Rosenthal DSO, RAN
Born 16 Jan 1901 Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
If you can help with photo or any information on this Officer please
use our comment form.
31 Dec 1914 Cadet
1 Jan 1919 Mid.
15 Jan 1921 A/S.Lt.
30 Mar 1921 S.Lt.
31 Oct 1922 Lt.
31 Oct 1930 Lt.Cdr.
30 Jan 1937 Cdr.
29 Jan 1945 A/Capt.
15 Nov 1958 Capt.
Retired: 16 Jan 1961
25 Nov 1941 DSO
10 Feb 1942 Bar to DSO
7 Jun 1951 OBE
Warship Commands listed for Alvord Sydney Rosenthal, RAN
Ship Rank Type From To
HMAS Westralia (F 95) Cdr. Armed Merchant Cruiser 27 Oct 1939 24 Sep 1940
HMAS Nestor (G 02) Cdr. Destroyer 20 May 1941 16 Jun 1942
We currently have no career / biographical information on this officer.
Events related to this officer
Destroyer HMAS Nestor (G 02)
15 Dec 1941 (position 36.28, -9.12)
German U-boat U-127 was sunk west of Gibraltar, in position 36°28'N, 09°12'W, by depth charges from the Australian destroyer HMAS Nestor (Cdr. A.S. Rosenthal, DSO, RAN).
Nestor had sailed from Haifa with the 7th Australian DD Flotilla (HMAS Napier, Nizam, Norman to take part i the operations connected with the passage of the Vigorous convoy to Malta. She was part of the screen for the cruiser force tasked with covering convoy MW.11, coming from Alexandria.
In the afternoon of 15 June, following the sinking of DD Airedale at the hands of a group of 33 Ju.87s belonging to II/St.G.3 under Hauptmann (Capt) Kurt Kuhlmey, there was a combined air attack on the Axis side, by 32 aircraft, of which 23 Italian (8 Cant-Z. 1007bs of the 35? Stormo BT, Lt.Col. Bruno Borghetti and 15 S.79 VTBs) and 9 Ju.88s of I/L.G.1 (Hauptmann Joachim Helbig). The German machines dive bombed the screen, near-missing CL Newcastle and the dummy BB Centurion.
In the meantime, the 8 Cant.Z. 1007 bis attacked the convoy, at the time located some 100 nautical miles north of Tobruk, in position 33°36'N, 24°30'E. At 1806 hrs two bombs, dropped from 17000 feet (5000 metres) fell very close to Nestor's hull, causing a large hull breach in way of the engineering spaces abaft the stack, causing her to go dead in the water with severe engine damage and immediate flooding of #1 boiler room. All personnel in this section was killed, power failed and a fire broke out.
Afer shoring up of the damaged bulkheads and firefighting had obtained a degree of stability to the situation, it was believed that, since the pums could still work and keep her afloat, albeit with a heavy list, the destroyer could be saved. She was therefore taken in tow at 2259 hours by Javelin while Eridge and Beaufort were detached from the screen to escort the tow.
Javelin's Commanding Officer (Lt.Cdr. J.C. Simms) was instructed by the SOP (Capt. S.H. Arliss on board Napier) to scuttle the cripple if conditions deteriorated, decision seconded by Rear-Admiral Vian, in overall command of the convoy.
The tow headed for Alexandria, but at sunrise the ships had covered only 80 nautical miles and Alexandria was still 230 nautical miles away and Lt.Cdr. Simms, fearing a renewal of the air attacks, and unwilling to risk his ship, decided to scuttle Nestor.
Javelin, therefore, removed Nestor's crew @ 0750 hours of 16 June and dropped 7 depth charges, sinking Nestor in 33°42'N, 24°27'E, some 115 nautical miles North-East of Tobruk. Casualties were limited to 4 dead and 1 wounded.
NB: all British reports indicate that Nestor's damage was caused by level bombers, therefore the success must be ascribed to the Italian Air Force, since the German planes who took part in the attack made diving attacks.
We are indebted to Mr. Francesco Mattesini for the detailed archival research which clarified the loss of this destroyer.
You can help improve officers Alvord Sydney Rosenthal's page
Click here to Submit events/comments/updates for this officer.
Please use this if you spot mistakes or want to improve his page.
Allied Commanders main page

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Buffalo Wild Wings (originally, Buffalo Wild Wings & Weck, thus the numeronym "BW3") is an American casual dining restaurant franchise in the United States, Canada, Mexico, the Philippines, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Oman. The company was founded in 1982, changed its name in 1998 and as of June 2017, it had 1,237 locations (625 directly owned by the company and 612 franchised locations) across all 50 states and DC.
The chain is best known for Buffalo-style chicken wings along with over a dozen dipping sauces, as well as a complement of other items such as chicken tenders and legs. The chain's menu also features appetizers, burgers, tacos, salads, and desserts.
Not only is the chain attributable to its famous wings, but also is recognized as a big partner with the organization, the Boys & Girls Clubs of America. Multiple times a year, the company does fundraisers and accepts donations that are later given to the Boys and Girls Club that allows them to participate in extracurricular and sporting events. Across the country, from California to Florida, Buffalo Wild Wing franchise owners advertise on the SkoolLive Kiosks at high school campuses near their store location. An ad from the Coral Cables, Florida franchise is shown.


text:
Joe McDonagh September 29, 2020 Interviews
Trevor Wallace moves to 3-0, adopts "Right-Handed Cro Cop" nickname
Trevor Wallace (right) has his hand raised in victory. Credit: Summit FC.
Trevor Wallace (3-0) yet again showed why he is a top heavyweight prospect in the world. It took under a round, yet again, for Wallace to finish his opponent, Jay Wilson, at CFFC 84.
"I'm 'The Right-Handed Cro Cop,'" Wallace laughed when the nickname arose in an interview in MMA-Prospects. "You start the nickname, and I'll roll with it."
Wallace has not suffered a loss in the cage as a professional, but did so twice as an amateur. Now a rising heavyweight prospect with many keeping a watchful eye, Wallace always reminds himself of the past to keep the future bright.
"I remind myself of my first loss," Wallace said. "I should have won that fight; I went in well overconfident. I wasn't prepared back then. I don't ever wanna taste that feeling again. I know exactly how I lost those fights: I beat myself."
For those who may be unfamiliar with one of the Southeast's top rising prospects, Wallace describes himself as a heavyweight who doesn't move like one. The Alabaman has never seen the second round since turning pro only six months ago.
"I have some really outstanding kicks, that's what they say in the gym," Wallace laughed. "I am right-handed but can hit really hard with my left side. I'm very well-rounded, but I can do things with my legs that heavyweights can't do."
Just six months into his professional career, and three years since Wallace made his amateur debut, Wallace is right where he expected to be. Still so young in his career, Wallace is on a mission. To be in the UFC in four years is the goal of the heavy-hitting heavyweight.
"I wanted to be in the UFC in four years. In February, I'll be training MMA for four years. In football, you get four years of college and then you test yourself," Wallace said.
"I didn't know how difficult this sport was; it's friggin' hard," continued Wallace. "Wrestling is hard, it takes time, but I'm close to on track. I want more fights. I have to get experience."
Wallace does believe he is close to that goal, even only four years since his first training session.
"I want to be ready for the call," Wallace said. "I'd rather challenge the best and be a little behind them than to never get that chance. Challenges make you live, when you get complacent you might as well die. I always wanna have a fire under me. I want the underdog fight, [where they] think I'm a trash can."
The full interview with Wallace is available in an audio-only format on our YouTube channel below:
Posted in Interviews and tagged Exclusives, Interviews, Trevor Wallace. Bookmark the permalink.
The Top 11 UFC Prospects competing on Fight Island
New England's Next: Undefeated Joe Lauzon prodigy Marty Navis set for CES return


text:
Adopting Assimilation – Part Two
April 11, 1997 • By Nakuset
In 1967, Jewish Family Services began putting Native children into Jewish homes. These stories tell what it is like for a Native American to be adopted into a white Jewish family. It is told through a series of interviews involving four adults. Part Two.
Ellah is 25, a Cree from Lac La Ronge, Sask. She was adopted when she three years old.
Q: For what reason were you put up for adoption?
A: My mother was an alcoholic and she left my sister and I, unattended
for long periods of time. Eventually a neighbor called social services and we were put into foster care. My mother arrived to pick up Sonya (sister), because Sonya, at the tender age of six, knew how to run a household, having been responsible for my care and the chores. I was later placed with a family in Montreal.
Q: How old were you when you were adopted?
A: Three years old.
Q: What new culture were you adopted into?
A: Judaism. My parents were very involved in the Jewish community. We went to Hebrew School three times a week, after regular school. We would celebrate the Sabbath just about every Friday night. When I was young I wanted to be a Rabbi when I grew up. By my teenage years I no longer wanted to be a good Jewish girl.
Q: How was the relationship with your parents when you were young?
A: Very confusing. I had been in many foster homes before. I figured this was temporary and never really bonded. Also, there wasn't very much information providing my parents about my history. They couldn't understand my behavior. My mother had a hard time coping. For example, whenever my father would enter my room alone, I would run out. He took this as a sign of rejection, and decided to treat me similar. My mother gave this statement as a reason when I asked her why my father was so cold to me. I remember thinking 'Give me a break, I was three years old', but I didn't dare question her.
The relationship was really bad and I often threatened to run away, as early as age six. I moved out when I was eighteen.
Q: How was the relationship with your siblings?
A: Strange. I had a brother, who was also adopted, (non-native) he was nine months older than me. He was adopted when he was a baby. You see, my mother didn't think she could have children. So they adopted Mark, and a couple of years later they sent out for me. Then my mother found out she was pregnant. Shortly after I arrived from Manitoba, my sister was born. My parents discouraged my brother and I from having a relationship. As we grew older, we spoke less and less until the only phrases he ever said were 'Mom wants you' or 'Telephone!' He followed my fathers footsteps and also ignored me. A strong relationship with my sister was encouraged for both my brother and me. I remember as a teenager, that I would treat my sister the way my brother treated me. My mother put a stop to that very soon.
Q: How is the relationship now?
A: With my parents, its civil and somewhat superficial. Actually, its pretty recent that were on speaking terms. I completely cut them out of my life for a year. With my sister, its superficial. There are so many issues from our past that never get discussed. Like it never happened. With my brother, its strange because we are talking. After all these years, he is a stranger. He used to be so cold and threaten violence. Now he is shy and polite. My brother is also withdrawn from the family. When we get together for like Rosh Hashanah, I notice that my brother vents his anger at my parents. I can't believe they take that from him. If I were to do that, I'd be dead. Simple. He is rude and is not shy to insult their ideas. My grandmothers explanation is that they don't want to lose another child (meaning me) so they put up with it. Though I have problems with my parents I am very close with my grandmother.
Q: Was there any abuse?
A: Yes. First my real mother beat the crap out of me as a baby. I have a list from my case study. Then my adopted family, they mostly verbally abused me, although it sometimes lead to physical. My first memory of being adopted is my mother taping my mouth shut because I cried too much. Even more strange I remember thinking that this isn't so bad – I knew I had been through worse. When I was twelve, I went to a private school called Weston. It was here that I encountered other Natives. Mohawks. I was so excited to meet other Natives and even though I didn't have the accent or know the language, I felt apart and proud. I promptly picked up their unmistakeable accent. When my parents heard me talk, they decided to show me my culture. They drove into Kahnawake (in their Mercedes) with the three of us. My brother was first to ask where we were. We were passing a poor area of town, consisting of many trailer homes. My father turned and looked at me. 'We're in Caugnawaga. Look at your people, living in huts, aren't you proud of them?' He opened the car door. 'Get out! Go live with your People!!. As I was deciding to go or not, three guys with baseball bats were following us. My father closed the door, and promptly drove out. That was my lesson on how to be proud of my people.
Q: Did your parents ever introduce you to your own culture?
Q: When did you realize that you were different (Native)?
A: I could tell by looking in a mirror! Everyone in my family was blond hair and blue eyed (expect for my father, but he still didn't resemble me.) It was obvious that I was different. I was always very proud of my Native heritage.
Q: Did you ever meet your birth parents?
A: Yes. I went back to Manitoba last year. My father died when I was two. I visited his grave in Flin Flon with my brother. I have thirteen siblings on my fathers side and seven on my mothers side
(including my adopted brother and sister, I have twenty two siblings.) I met my mother in Prince Albert. She's been dry for five years now.
Q: How do they fit into your life now?
A: I only met six of my siblings, and I keep in touch with them. My mother calls about every month. Sometimes for money. I find it very strange. I just met my real mother and I have to take care of her. Once she asked me for either a winter coat or money for a coat. I didn't have the money so I sent her a coat. I couldn't say no, but the decision stressed me out. (My boyfriend volunteered the coat.)
Q: Do you feel any longing to go back to your homeland?
A: Sometimes. I have a lot of family in Manitoba. But right now my life is here.
Q: How do you see yourself today?
A: I see myself as a Jewish Native American. I am very proud of my heritage. I have a lot of respect for the Jewish culture. I'm interested in learning traditional spirituality and the longhouse, although.
Q: What culture will you raise your children?
A: I think it is important for my future children to know their ancestry. They will be brought up on traditional values, and will also be exposed to the Jewish culture. (I'm sure we will also a Christmas tree.) Give them the best of both worlds.
Q: Do you believe you are assimilated?
A: No. I don't believe I've been absorbed into the Jewish culture. And I don't think I'm fooling anyone. When I was a teenager, I would date Jewish boys. I can think of two women (mothers of my boyfriends) that gave me hard time for going out with their sons. They both had the same reason. I wasn't a real Jew. Even though I had been converted and I went to Hebrew school, to them I wasn't good enough. My boyfriend is Mohawk from Kahnawake. I feel so close and comfortable with his family. His uncle calls me his adopted niece. When he says that I feel happy, but I certainly don't want to be adopted again.


text:
The Smithsonian Is Restoring the Original Starship Enterprise
The model of Kirk's ship moves to the front entrance of the National Air and Space Museum in 2016.
By John Wenz Published: Dec 31, 2014
The Enterprise in its former home. Images: Smithsonian.
The original USS Enterprise model from Star Trek is being restored in anticipation of its big move from the basement gift shop of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum to the main entrance.
The original model Enterprise was delivered to Desilu studios on December 29, 1964, for the filming of the original pilot episode, "The Cage." It was donated to the museum in 1974. The model was taken off display in September and replaced with a placard that claims it is currently cloaked—even though cloaking technology for Federation starships is clearly illegal under the Treaty of Algeron of 2311.
The model is under analysis at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, an adjunct facility of the Air and Space Museum located in Virginia that is the current home to the Space Shuttle Discovery and former home to the Space Shuttle test model Enterprise. A team led by curator Margaret A. Weitekamp is determining what the restoration will require. They hope to send the Enterprise back to the museum in July 2016.
Cracks in the original model.
Via TrekCore.
John Wenz
John Wenz is a Popular Mechanics writer and space obsessive based in Philadelphia. He tweets @johnwenz.
Why the NFL's Artificial Turf Is So Controversial
How Fender Makes Its Stratocaster Electric Guitar
21 of the Best Gifts From BIPOC-Owned Businesses
Rubik's Re-Cube Is the Puzzle You Love, Modernized
Child Actors From Horror Movies, Then and Now
The 31 Most Hard-to-Pronounce Words
The Best Ski Bags for Winter Travel
Can You Finish This 42,000-Piece Puzzle?
Pedro Pascal's Jacket From 'The Last of Us'
The Best of Outdoor Retailer Winter 2023
The 20 Best Educational Toys for Kids
The Best Mountain Bike Accessories


The Nigerian entertainment industry was once again thrown into mourning as the news of the demise of another veteran actress,Geraldine Ekeocha filtered in. This unfortunate incident happened as the preparation for the burial of veteran actor,Sam Loco Efe is in top gear. The industry was jolted by the news that Geraldine passed away during a fibroid operation. According to a source,the movie icon breathed her last at the University Teaching Hospital(UNTH) Ifuku,Enugu State. Before her death on Sunday,4 September 2011,she was one talented Enugu-based actress who featured in over 80 movies and several soap operas with many of them still running on air. Geraldine Ekeocha who was aged 56 left behind 7 children,6 girls and 1 boy. Geraldine's a native of Imo State but was resident in Enugu State where her acting career began. We learnt the family members have not yet decided on the burial arrangement. click the link below to go to... NOLLYWOOD LOSES ANOTHER LEGEND.