Write a summary based on this article:

WASHINGTON (AP) — As a crucial second sign-up season gears up, the Obama administration said Sunday that HealthCare.gov is stable and working well, a far cry from last year's frozen computer screens and frustrated customers.

 Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell smiles while answering a reporters question following her tour of the Greater Prince William Community Health Center, Evergreen Terrace Site, in Manassas,... (Associated Press)

 Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell gestures while answering a reporters question following her tour of the Greater Prince William Community Health Center, Evergreen Terrace Site, in Manassas,... (Associated Press)

 Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell said she expects "strong and healthy growth" for 2015. About 7 million people are signed up, and Burwell expects to grow that by 2 million more or so.

 The Congressional Budget Office has projected a total of 13 million enrolled for 2015, and some see the administration as trying to lower expectations.

 Burwell told NBC's "Meet the Press" that 100,000 people had submitted new applications this weekend via the federal website serving 37 states. That's a big difference from last year, when only a handful of customers managed to enroll on the first day.

 Burwell also said that a half-million people who already have coverage through the program were able to log into their accounts this time.

 There were reports Saturday that returning customers had problems, but some of that may have been confusion trying to remember user names and passwords.

 Administration spokesman Aaron Albright said Sunday he had not seen any indication of problems.

 Burwell said call centers have taken 100,000 calls, another indication of consumer interest.

 President Barack Obama noted the improvements. "HealthCare.gov works really well now," he said.

 HealthCare.gov is an online marketplace that offers subsidized private coverage to people who don't have health insurance on the job. Because of political opposition and technical issues, the federal government is running the health insurance exchange in most states.

 Thirteen states and Washington, D.C., are running their own markets. Washington state had problems Saturday with its exchange, which was generating inaccurate subsidy calculations.

 Premiums, on average, appear to be stable this year. But experts say overall national numbers can mask big changes from state to state, and sometimes even within parts of a state. In particular, customers who already got covered this year are being advised to shop around to avoid significant cost increases.

 With Congress fully under Republican control, the administration cannot afford another website meltdown.

 ___

 Online:

 Health care website: https://www.healthcare.gov/ ||||| Getty Burwell: 100,000 new Obamacare applications

 Secretary of Health and Human Services Sylvia Mathews Burwell said on Sunday 100,000 people submitted new applications for Obamacare in the first days of the second open enrollment period.

 Speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Burwell offered an update to the numbers provided Saturday when she said 23,000 applied in the first eight hours of the new open enrollment period.

 Story Continued Below

 In addition to new applicants, 500,000 customers were able to log on to HealthCare.gov, and 1 million people have gone “window shopping” to compare insurance plans and prices over the past week.

 The numbers offer a stark contrast to the first enrollment period a year ago when HealthCare.gov launched with severe technical problems that prevented people from applying.

 Authors: |||||

– After last year's dismal debut HealthCare.gov is feeling much better now, and is busily connecting Americans with health care plans as the second sign-up period opened yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell said today. The site took in 100,000 new applications in its first 24 hours, reports Politico, saw 500,000 log in to their accounts, and 1 million more went "window-shopping" for plans. Call centers took 100,000 calls. Burwell said she expects "strong and healthy growth" this year—about another 2 million people to add to the 7 million already signed up, per the AP. A White House spokesman said today there was no indication of problems. "HealthCare.gov works really well now," said President Obama.


– Sarah Palin has been granted a restraining order against a Pennsylvania man who sent her a gun receipt and told her he was buying a one-way ticket to Alaska. Shawn Christy, 18, has been banned from contacting Palin and her family and has been ordered to stay at least a mile away from the Palin home. Palin’s friend, Kristan Cole—who Christy called this week to tell her his plane had landed in Alaska—has also been granted a protective order, the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman reports. "Bottom line is, he is crazy and could kill me," Palin testified. "He wants me dead." The court heard that Christy—who claims to have had a sexual relationship with Palin—sent her a letter saying "he is trying to follow God but has evil in him, and that he is going to sell everything and come to Alaska with his shotgun." Christy, with his persistent efforts to contact Palin and her associates, has "risen to the top of the dozens and dozens of people" who have threatened Palin over the last couple of years, Palin's attorney told AP.

Expand this summary.

FILE - In this Sept. 15, 2010 file photo, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin appears as the featured speaker at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affair's annual Liberty Gala at the Convention Center in... (Associated Press)

 FILE - In this Sept. 15, 2010 file photo, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin appears as the featured speaker at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affair's annual Liberty Gala at the Convention Center in... (Associated Press)

 Sarah Palin has been granted a restraining order against a Pennsylvania man accused of stalking and threatening her.

 Alaska Magistrate Judge Colleen Ray issued a 20-day protective order on Monday against 18-year-old Shawn R. Christy, after she found probable cause to believe he had stalked the former governor and vice presidential candidate.

 Palin and her attorney claimed Christy made implied threats through phone and written messages, allegedly telling Palin to "watch her back," saying he was buying a one-way ticket to Alaska and sending a receipt for a gun purchase.

 Palin testified by telephone that she feared for her life, and for her family's safety: "Bottom line is, he is crazy and could kill me," Palin said, according to the court transcript. "He wants me dead."

 Palin also testified that he also believes he has some kind of relationship with her daughter, Willow, and has brought up the girl's name.

 Christy was ordered to have no contact with Palin's family and to stay a mile away from her home and from a Wasilla area high school. A protective order also was issued for Palin's friend, Kristan Cole, who, according to the document, testified that Christy has been contacting her since 2009.

 He had sent her a letter with the proof of a gun purchase, claimed to have had an affair with Palin and wrote, in letters of up to 10 pages long, that "he is trying to follow God but has evil in him, and that he is going to sell everything and come to Alaska with his shotgun," according to the court order.

 Cole testified that Christy had called Monday, the day the orders were issued, and told her he had arrived in Alaska.

 A message left for Christy at his home in McAdoo, Pa., wasn't immediately returned. Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein said Christy did not attend the hearing.

 In an interview, Van Flein said Christy had "risen to the top of the dozens and dozens of people" who have threatened Palin since 2008, when she emerged on the national stage. "He stands out as the most persistent," trying to reach her through friends, associates and family members, he said.

 Another court hearing is scheduled for next month, when Van Flein said Palin could seek a six-month order.

 Palin travels extensively around the country, giving speeches, rallying support for conservative candidates she favors and, just this week, rooting for daughter Bristol as she competed on "Dancing with the Stars."

 The Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman newspaper first reported the case. ||||| By Heather A. Resz

 Published on Tuesday, September 28, 2010 5:34 PM AKDT

 Sarah Palin obtained a protective order Monday against an 18-year-old Pennsylvania man who sent her receipts from a gun purchase, along with a letter saying “he tried to follow the Bible but had evil and wickedness in him.”Palin, 46, filed the request in Anchorage District Court against Shawn R. Christy, a man she says began stalking her by e-mail and phone since the summer of 2009. Palin’s friend, Kristan Cole, 48, filed for and received a similar protective order against Christy.The 20-day protective orders Anchorage Magistrate Colleen Ray signed Monday prohibit Christy from following, approaching, confronting, watching or otherwise staking or threatening to stalk or assault Palin or Cole.The protective orders say Christy has been stalking the families since 2009.Cole said she became concerned about Christy’s letters and e-mails for months, but it ended up in court yesterday after the man called her to say his plane had landed in Alaska.“When someone sends you proof that they’ve purchased weapons. Proof that they know where you live. And said that they are looking into purchasing a one-way plane ticket to Alaska and then calls from a cell phone with a 907 number, it’s over the line and we need protecting.”Cole said the Wasilla Police called him back at that phone number and spoke.Cole testified that Christy sent a letter in August 2010 saying that “he tried to follow the bible but had evil and wickedness in him.” She said Christy told her that he is convinced she is evil and must be punished.“Petitioner is concerned because the respondent appears to be unstable and has stated that he believes petitioner is evil and that she needs to be punished and that he is coming to confront her to get her to tell the truth.”Christy also claims to have had a sexual relationship with Gov. Palin, the documents say. “Petitioner testified that respondent has told her that he has had an affair with Gov. Palin and that petitioner needs to tell the FBI the truth about the affair.”Palin testified that she has not had a sexual relationship with petitioner, the filing stated.Attorney Thomas Van Flein, who represented Palin and Cole at the hearing Monday, also provided evidence that the Secret Service investigate Christy alleging that he had threatened or said he want to sexually assault Gov. Palin.Cole said Wasilla Police Department also helped the two families put together a safety plan. "I can’t say enough good about the Wasilla Police."Cole said she and former Gov. Palin want women to know that they don’t have to live in fear if they are being stalked. “There are avenues to get help. Staying silent doesn’t help anybody.”The restraining order against Christy prohibits contact with Cole and her children and lists Todd Palin and all of the Palin’s children and their grandchild.The 20-day protective order Anchorage Magistrate Colleen Ray signed Monday prohibits Christy from following, approaching, confronting, watching or otherwise staking or threatening to stalk or assault Palin.The order also forbids Christy to telephone, e-mail or otherwise contact Cole or Palin or anyone in their immediate familes, orders him to stay at least a mile away from her home.The two women requested a long-term order. A hearing on that request is scheduled for 10 a.m., Oct. 13, before Anchorage Master John E. Duggan.If Christy violates the order, a peace office can arrest without a warrant.Tracy Kalytiak contributed to this story.This is a breaking news story and will be updated throughout the day. |||||


Write an article based on this summary:

– The Union Street Guest House in Hudson, NY, wants you to keep your crummy opinions to yourself. So if you post something about the hotel’s "rude customer service, unclean, terrible odor," as NY Pix 11 quotes one reviewer, the hotel will collect a $500 fine. It’s right in their policy, which states that customers who’ve booked weddings or other events at the hotel will have their deposit deducted for every negative review written by their guests. Want your money back? Remove the review(s), the NY Post reports. But woe to the reviewer who doesn’t remove his complaints—the owners tend to get defensive. When a guest said staff was rude when they asked for ice, the hotel posted a response: "I know you guys wanted to hang out and get drunk for 2 days ... I was so so so sorry that our ice maker and fridge were not working and not accessible." Despite the hotel’s efforts, it still has a poor average rating on Yelp.

115

 349 Union St

 Hudson , NY 12534

 (518) 828-0958

 My wife and I decided to go on a little trip last minute (within 2 hours of the decision, we packed up and went) on New Years Day. We found Union Street Guest House using a combination of Yelp and Google and saw they had a vacancy and we were able to book a room on line. Union Street is located one block away from the shops on Warren Street. It is Hudson's Main street where there are numerous antique and boutique shops. The only suite available was there "Gallery Suite' aka "The Presidential Suite". Chris at the front desk said, "You'll know why when you get up there." The price was fair being $200/night. But this was for three rooms. All other places to stay in Hudson that night were A) more expensive and B) only one room, so we went with it. This place consists of two buildings. The house to the right serves as the check in lobby and above it is a beautifully decorated lounge area. Antique furniture centers the lounge with the far side having a small library along with a ladder. Exposed brick and aged wood decorated the walls and ceilings nicely. The other side had a mini honor bar with various liqours. If you want beer downstairs there is a fridge with beer in it. Just leave some money in a metal box to help restock the bar. Parking is street parking. Make sure you leave your car across the street and not on the side of the guest house cause there is no parking there almost all the way down Union St. The guest house is to the left. As you enter, you will see two doors and you'll follow the one to the left. It is mostly all hardwood floor with the occasional area rug so the place does creek in some areas. We were able to hear walking or closing of doors of other guests in the house. A downside. The Gallery suite was upstairs and the only suite on the second floor. When you step inside you walk into a large living area with two vintage chairs and paintings. To the left is the study that is full of pictures of past presidents along with a library that is mostly about our US presidents. To the right of entering is the kitchen. No stove here, but there's a microwave and large fridge. Coffee maker and water heater for brewing up a cup. The bathroom was beautifully lit with a ivory tub and wrap around curtain. The three rooms weren't as decorated as the rest of the suite. One was pretty small and looked like a walk in closet. There is another small room similar to a doll room. Nice to sit and chat with friends. Overall, beautifully decorated and most important, clean. There is free wifi but doesn't seem fast (used to Verizon Fios) and sometimes had some connection problems Not a bed and breakfast place because there is no breakfast being served. Creeky floors and thin walls may be an issue if you're looking peace and privacy but It definitely gives you a feeling of home.

 Was considering a stay here but now learning about their "$500" bad review policy, im out. Good luck with your establishment from here on out. We can only hope you've learned something from this.

 This is the 7th time I had to write this review on this deplorable company. Stop paying to make your image better, stop charging LOYAL customers $500 for not agreeing with your terrible and unethical business practices. Union House should be renamed "Screw you Because We have Your Credit Card information and we're going to charge you $500 multiple times just to spite you." Horrible company, even worst service, and to top it off ... Extremely bad management.

 I knew that this place has a reputation for poor service when I booked a stay here for a wedding, and like some of the five star reviews below say, that is exactly what I was looking for. So i couldn't have been more pleased when I called to change my reservation, and was promptly berated over the phone for asking to checkout a day earlier. The management, to my delight, even charged me a bonus fee for the inconvenience. I should mention that I am REALLY into hospitality masochism, and found out about USGH on a site for people like me called sadisticservice.com. Unikn Street has become known as a mecca for self-abusive people like me seeking a perfect place to get away, pay a fortune, and suffer abuse both verbally and physically. I knew I was in for a (mis)treat(ment) when I first arrived. Instead of finding convenient parking, i circled the potholed and poorly lit lot until settling for a spot on the street a few blocks away. First impressions can be deceiving, so I didn't let this get my hopes up. But prospects only got better (worse) after i shlepped my luggage back over to the lobby. I was greeted at the door by the the foulest smelling dog turd I have had the pleasure to step in since my stay at the El Paso Motel 6 (which I also highly recommend). One of the owner's adorably odious dogs had deposited the feces ON the threshold, in an ingenious location, so that the action of the door smeared the dog's noxious refuse across the taupe doormat, making an unavoidable obstacle of odor. At the front desk, the manager demonstrated that he was no less skilled than the dog in the art of misanthropy. He was engaged in a heated argument with a guest about the bill, so he waved me off, giving me the opportunity to admire the lobby's decor. Taxidermy animal heads, abstract art with thick paint brush smears (all for sale!), big vases filled with dessicated reeds, and small, wobbly tables to sit and sip burnt coffee. Once the fracas with the other guest reached its bitter conclusion, I introduced myself to the manager: a short, monobrowed, igor of a man with a stained butler vest and permanent scowl. He promptly informed me that Union House had no record of my reservation. I showed him the email confirmation, which elicited an indignant huff of consternation. He grudgingly inspected his ledger again and found my room had been rented to another couple. He informed me, with a note of feindish delight, that there was NO room for me, and that I would have to leave or else be defenestrated manually. Naturally I chose the latter option. I give the USGH a one star review because, after roiling me up in sick anticipation of a grueling three night confinement in service hell, I was sent away and forced to endure cloying hospitality at the insufferably pleasant Croff House a few blocks away. Fortunately, USGH did keep all my money, as a consolation for failing to provide the gulagesque internment I had been guaranteed. And of course I was still able to take advantage of their offer to charge me $500 to review them poorly on Yelp.

 This is not about the $500 fee for a negative review. I got to Hudson a little late, traffic can get prickly. I was exhausted and wanted to just hit the hay. The kind woman at the front gave me my room, no problem. I got to my room, and someone had defecated next to the toilet. Not on, not in - next to. My fiancé thought this was done by a horse, but a horse could not fit in the small room to begin with. Upon further examination, the feces were left by a human. I inquired the manager, if this is normal. He did not believe me and said that "I was responsible for this" and that "I was the "poopertrator". I am incredibly frustrated and angry at this establishment. That do not take their guests seriously or even seem to care. I would give this place 2 stars because I wanted to give it a chance, thinking some circle jerk redditors sunk the review base here. But for once they are right. This is just a bad business.

 This "business" is ridiculous. You have to book two nights if you go to ANYONE wedding in the area?!? What the heck kind of rule is that? These owners should not be in this hospitality business as they haven't been educated on how hospitality works. It's dirty and ill taken care of. The "honor" bar has OPEN bottles of booze where anyone could contaminate or drug because there's nobody safeguarding the bottles. What would happen if a freaking roofie was put into the whiskey??? Don't go here. Go anywhere else. These guys think they are too legit to quit. They are fools and don't deserve a dime of your hard earned money. And then threatening guests for negative reviews?? How is that not sleazy and or ineffective? Perhaps one should question why they want to run a hotel if they are misanthropists?!?! My IDEA would be that they run some kind of illegal business. Of course that's just a guess on my part due to their actions and I have zero proof. It's just a feeling not a statement and not slander. This place is like those restaurants where the staff is "mean" to you but you know ahead of time and it's more of a performance. This place is full of wannabe thugs with no self respect. Having a wedding here in my opinion would be just asking for bad luck. I'm sure that some sorcery has cursed this place!

 We come to Hudson quite frequently to escape the city and always have a great time up here. We decided to stay at The Union Street Guest House for our last weekend getaway and was not thrilled with this hotel. The place is definitely unique, but not the type of unique that they seem to pride themselves on. Antique furniture is "cool" and "hip" in theory but when you neglect the dust build up long enough for "Jaden" to write their name in a few times then the charm wears off pretty quick. My biggest problem, our bill was $468.95, which is a reasonable rate for the weekend except the charge appeared as $4,689.50 on my Amex. Assuming this was just a simple human error, we called the front desk and they agreed and said that they would revert the charges and adjust accordingly. We waited a week, and still the error had not been corrected, so we emailed multiple times with no response. Calls to the front desk always were met with the same line, that they were going to adjust the rate accordingly. After three weeks of attempts to revert the accidental premium we were charged I finally called Amex and they happily removed the charges and are taking care of the Union Street Guest House. 5-Stars goes out to Amex for fixing a sub 1-Star experiment in mediocracy, my next trip to Hudson will include an event celebrating the closure of the Union Street Guest House, with accommodation elsewhere.

 If I could rate this place less than 1 star, I would. It isn't because the accommodations were bad...it is because they owe me $952.00. Here is the story: I stayed here for my good friend's wedding in May 2014. Due to a room change at the last minute (not Union's fault- my friend the bride, had to rearrange rooms to better accommodate her guests), I was told by Union that I needed to pay for the second room in full and then I would be refunded for the first room. I paid $952.00 for the first room and $728.00 for the second room so I should have been refunded for the $952.00 for the first room (my other friends ended up staying in the first room and I know for a fact that they paid the full amount for their stay up front). Long story short, I have yet to see the $952.00 in my bank account. Yep, they never refunded me. The last communication of any kind from them is an email reply dated 7/16/14 after I asked them to please confirm that I was credited because I didn't see it on my cc statement. The reply states: "Yes, you were credited." After that, I emailed again asking for the date of the refund and last four digits of the credit card they supposedly refunded (because, again, I couldn't find the refund on my statement). The reply? RADIO SILENCE. Since that time I have written 5 POLITE emails (I would copy and paste them all here, but trust me they were very polite- I assume the best of people) and left numerous polite voicemails (including one where I pleaded with them to find it within themselves not to take my hard earned money.) The reply? RADIO SILENCE. I am still in disbelief that I was taken advantage of in this way. Though, I have come to understand through my friend (the bride)'s experience (they owe her $2500 from her deposit), as well as others on here (and the whole "joke" about their policy of keeping $500 if you write a bad review- google it if you haven't yet and see how shady/not funny it is)- that these people are shady and this is a shady business. My next step is reporting them to the better business bureau and then letting go of hopes that I will ever get my refund. Please stay elsewhere (there are a bunch of great places in the town where other people stayed) and don't support this dishonesty. Thank you for reading!

 We stayed three nights in the Union Street Guest House's Bainbridge Suite, after pre-paying for four. Due to a medical emergency we had to leave before the last night. We released the room at 9:30am. Leaving aside the owner's refusal to refund any portion of the final night's $250 charge due to our forced departure, here is what we found during our three days: -- Two dogs, belonging to either the owner or the owner's renter in an apartment next door, barked and woke us up and kept us awake. -- Clearly heard the owner or his tenant, yelling and yawning, through the wall. Owner later told us: "Some of the guests came into the back kitchen & laundry area to watch a game." -- -- A neighbor in an adjoining apartment speaking loudly or shouting. -- Doors slamming. -- A tenant having very loud phone conversations, (punctuated with lots of loud, "No, he didn't!"s) on the other side of a thin wall. -- A rumbling washing machine on the other side of said wall, in adjoining apartment. Upon arrival on a Thursday afternoon, we found: -- A McDonald's sack, a Kraft Cream Cheese carton and other trash lining the walk, from Union Street to the Bainbridge Suite entrance. -- Peeling paint on the master bedroom's radiator. -- Poor quality pillows. -- One-ply toilet paper. -- Heat cycling off during the night, leaving the rooms cold. -- A view of a half dozen dog feces on the grass behind each bedroom window. -- One of four lamps not working. -- One of four venetian blinds missing equipment. -- Our "light snack en suite," consisting of a bag of mini-Oreo's, a bag of Goldfish and four Keebler crackers. Do yourself a favor, and look elsewhere for accommodation in the Hudson area. If you expect a quiet, problem-free stay, our warning is: Don't. The owner believes peace and quiet are guaranteed only at higher price points i.e. a more expensive suite. Regarding our discomfort, he said: "Please remember that even though we do work hard to create complete privacy for our guests, we are pretty much full all the time and this is a public place...If you ever decide to stay with us again, I highly recommend the Gallery Suite. It is a little bit more but for that many nights, especially with children, you have much more space and you are above the fray as it were." For $150-$250 a night, we don't expect to find ourselves in the midst of any "fray." Nor do we expect guests coming over to "watch a game" next to a room that is far from soundproofed. The duplicitous, dishonest, disingenuous owner told the world after our stay: "We are so sorry these guests did not like our cancellation policy. if there's any way to make it up we would have but it wasn't to be...." "We would have"? They could have made a $250 refund or they could have offered another night's stay. No offer of any kind was ever made. Although the property is "pretty much full all the time," the owner feels no compunction charging you for a room you have released to him at 9:30 a.m., and charging someone else the same rate for the same evening, grossing $500. Avoid this establishment with every fiber in your body.

 I've never had a more pitiful staff. Never touch this place it is so dirty. Why do they have to be so unprofessional. It is more like an untrained staff that is completely rude. Never again.

 This was the worst hotel experience of my life. I am not exaggerating and I have never even written a review before.... when I looked up this disgusting place, that's when I saw that this place has other horrible reviews. STAY AWAY! - Dogs and dog crap everywhere. - LOUD drunk guests that are friends of the owners. - toilet paper so cheap we bought our own. - peeling paint and things that don't work. - RUDE STAFF! Honestly the list goes on and on.... Also, everything is cheap.The furniture. Fake plants. Everything....like it's from the 70s. TAKE A CLOSE look at the pictures and you can actually tell....and then remind yourself that these are the BEST pics that this place could muster. STAY AWAY.

 I stayed here for a wedding in May. Let's just say this was the worst experience I've ever had at a "hotel". The whole place smelled old and damp which I later found out was mold. The staff rubbed both myself and my gf the wrong way with their unhelpful, rude and inhospitable manor. The bed felt lumpy and the rooms were way to hipster for my tastes. I ultimately had to sleep in a sleeping bag to avoid the lumps. Heck I would have had a better experience if I just camped out on the lawn outside. The worst part, however, was the "hotel" policy about reviews. So in an effort to ensure that the bride and groom (whom are two of my best friends) don't get charged I felt it best to whip out my rarely used 2nd yelp account. I challenge this place to now figure out which wedding that I attended should receive your policy wrath. HAHAHAHA!!!!!!

 It would be an amazing place to stay if the staff and management wasn't so unhelpful, rude, and apathetic towards the most basic of requests. Save your money and frustration. I'm sure there is somewhere else you'd like to stay.

 I gave this place a neutral (2 star) review after having my wedding here, and they told me that it was negative feedback and that they're going to kept $500 from my deposit after the wedding to cover the damages to their image. DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY UNLESS YOU WANT THEM TO STEAL YOUR DEPOSIT.

 Stayed here a few years ago - this place looks like my first apartment, except that I could get a full month for what I paid for two days here. Find yourself a cardboard box and choose the urine-stained street instead!

 The management of this hotel had the gall to email us twice to threaten us financially about the negative review! Here is an excerpt from their first email: "please note that your recent on-line review of our Inn will cost the wedding party that left us a deposit $500. This money be charged via the deposit they have left us unless/until it is removed. Any other or future reviews will also be charged to the wedding party (bride & groom) from the guarantee they have provided us. " Disgusting! Instead of taking responsibility and striving to improve their customer service, they instead resort to intimidation!

 After not using Yelp for over a year, I figured this was worth getting on. This is a horrible establishment. The stay was bad, the food was bad, the service was bad. Was there anything good about the stay? Yeah when I left and got the hell out. Don't support a business like this. Very unprofessional and rude. I will stay at a Motel 6 next time before I Stay here. Or maybe just lay out in the park under a bench. At least a homeless person there might offer me a sheet or towel or something. More then I can say about this place.

 I've never even stayed here, but read about all this on Reddit. Probably like many of you. My rating's the same, though: Don't go here. Don't reward them for trying to keep human beings from voicing their discontent. Pretty disgusting that rather than try and better their service, this place tries to intimidate people to shut their mouths. Like the mob. Congrats on your suicide, Union Street Guest House.

 I have never stayed here and wouldn't want to stay here based on this story alone: http://pagesix.com/2014/08/04/hotel-charges-500-for-every-bad-review-posted-online/?_ga=1.41385890.145819513.1358069560 If this place really stands by their products and offerings, then they shouldn't be charging $500 when they get a negative review. If they screw up, they should fix whatever is wrong. No company in their right mind would charge someone for telling about how bad (or good) their experience was. I wouldn't be surprised if this place went under because of this story alone. By the way, if the owners want this review changed, then respond to the news paper's request for comment, own up to your business decisions. When I see a follow-up story denoting your responses, then I'll update this review. ||||| HUDSON, NY (PIX11)– A fancy hotel located in upstate New York is charging its guests for bad reviews.

 Union Street Guest House in Hudson is known for its mix of luxury and classic sensibility, but apparently it can’t handle some criticism when it comes to weddings or event bookings at their site.

 The classy inn says on its website, “there will be a $500 dollar fine that will be deducted from your deposit for every negative review of USGH place on any internet site by anyone in your party and/or attending your wedding even if you stay here to attend a wedding anywhere in the area and leave us a negative review on any internet site you agree to a $500 fine for each negative review.”

 Outraged guests certainly didn’t take it lightly.

 “This was worst hotel I have ever encountered,” Michael G from Manhattan said. “Rude customer service, unclean, terrible odor. Then they had the audacity to tell me they would charge me $500 from my deposit if I posted a negative review online…have they heard of the freedom of speech?”

 One customer posted an excerpt of the hotel’s email after being threatened twice.

 “Disgusting!” Rabih Z of Alexandria said. “Instead of taking responsibility and striving to improve customer service, they instead resort for intimidation.”

 Other guests had positive reviews, raving about the place’s vintage amenities.

 “Fabulous place!” fellow New Yorker Elizabeth C. said. “Looking forward to another weekend getaway.”

 However, if the bad review gets taken off, the hotel will refund this fee. |||||


Robin Thicke Gushes On Stage ... I'm Lost Without Paula

 Robin Thicke -- Pours Out Heart On Stage ... I'm Lost Without Paula Patton

 EXCLUSIVE

 got back to performing tonight and wasted no time using the stage to beg for's mercy ... opening up to the crowd about the break-up and dedicating a song to her.Thicke wore his wedding ring through the show in Fairfax, VA and told the crowd -- "For y'all that don't know me and my wife separated, but I'm trying to get my girl back. She's a good woman."He also told fans he'd written the songfor Paula ... before launching into the hit -- which we gotta say is kinda the perfect song for a guy trying to get back on a chick's good side.Then again, Paula's heard this tune a hundred times. ||||| Robin Thicke 'I'm Just Trying to Get Her Back'

 Robin Thicke -- 'I'm Just Trying to Get Her Back'

 EXCLUSIVE

 was shockingly candid as he arrived in Washington D.C. Thursday afternoon ... making it clear he's not throwing in the towel on his marriage, telling our photog, "I'm just trying to get her back."TMZ broke the story ...called him last Friday and said their marriage was over, and Robin flew to Canada -- where she was filming -- in a desperate but failed attempt to change her mind.As we reported ... things really fell apart after Robin simulated sex with Miley Cyrus onstage at the VMAs last month. But Robin told our photog, the performance had nothing to do with his marital problems.Our sources say Paula was livid and felt "utterly disrespected" by Robin's antics with Miley.Robin is in D.C. for a concert Thursday night. He says his performance will be the same, even though some of his songs are about Paula.He told our photog he's just trying to figure things out. ||||| Robin Thicke Steps Out Smiling Post-Split, Says He's "Trying to Get" Paula Patton Back

 He wants to twerk it out! Robin Thicke has made it clear that he's not ready to throw in the towel on his marriage just yet. The R&B; crooner stepped out for the first time since announcing his split from Paula Patton in Washington, D.C. on Thursday, Feb. 27 and said he wants his estranged wife back.

 PHOTOS: Robin and Paula -- the way they were

 "You know, just trying to get her back man," Thicke, 36, told TMZ cameras at a D.C. airport on Thursday. Bundled up in a peacoat, the "Blurred Lines" entertainer was all smiles while walking to his car outside. Whether he was wearing his wedding band is unknown, as he kept his hands hidden in his pockets during the duration of the quick chat. (On Feb. 26, actress Patton, 38, stepped out for the first time post-split without her ring in L.A.)

 As previously reported, the high school sweethearts -- who are parents to 3-year-old son Julian -- announced their separation in a joint statement on Feb. 24. "Robin wanted to save their marriage, but it was Paula's choice and she ended it," an insider told Us of the twosome. "Robin does not want this divorce."

 PHOTOS: 2013's biggest splits

 Robin Thicke and Paula Patton

 Credit: Larry Busacca/WireImage

 "Robin was not blindsided -- he knew this was coming out," another source added. "But he was committed to saving their marriage. He didn't want this."

 Thicke may have been vocal about his hope for reconciliation, but the singer kept tight-lipped when a cameraman asked if Miley Cyrus played a part in the split. On Feb. 25, Us exclusively reported that Thicke's VMAs performance with the "Wrecking Ball" songstress tested the couple's marriage.

 PHOTOS: Hollywood's hottest married couples

 "The Miley Cyrus fiasco was a big test of their relationship," an insider told Us of Thicke and the Baggage Claim star. "He asked her to help him out as a friend and a wife, and defend him and the performance. He begged her to speak out for him and be there for him."

 "She agreed to be the good wife after he begged and pleaded," the source further explained. "Then he asked her to stick with him through awards season, and she agreed. She attended the Grammys with him as a favor." ||||| Robin Thicke had an emotional moment on stage while performing for the first time since announcing Monday that he and wife Paula Patton were splitting up The "Blurred Lines" singer began his concert at the Patriot Center in Virginia with a brave face Thursday. But as the night wore on, signs that his marital issues were weighing on him began to show."For those of you who don't know, my wife and I got separated a few days ago, and I want everybody here to know that I'm trying to get my girl back," Thicke told fans, as he dedicated his song "Lost Without U" – which he called Patton's favorite – to his estranged wife."I'm going to need you guys to help me through this," Thicke said as he turned away from the crowd to hide his emotions.As concertgoer Mandy Vazquez tells PEOPLE, "He even messed up on some of the words because he was crying."In an exclusive statement to PEOPLE on Monday, the singer, 36, and his actress wife, 38, said, "We will always love each other and be best friends, however, we have mutually decided to separate at this time." ||||| Paula Patton Robin Lays it On Thicke with FLORAL ASSAULT

 is GUILTY of a floral assault ... bombarding his estranged wife with begging-for-forgiveness bouquets ... at least that's the way it seems.'s Hollywood Hills home was inundated with gigantic, expensive floral arrangements Thursday ... hours before Robin got on stage and told the audience he's gunning to get his girl back.True enough ... it's possible Robin didn't send the flowers, but it would be remarkably coincidental that they came from someone else.Typically people don't send beautiful bouquets when a woman dumps her hubby. ||||| Fredrick M. Brown/ Getty Images

 ET has learned that while being followed by paparazzi, actress Paula Patton's mother and assistant were in a minor car accident with Patton and estranged husband singer Robin Thicke's three-year-old son, Julian, in the back seat.

 The accident occurred on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles, CA in Patton's black Range Rover. No injuries have been reported.

 This accident comes after ET recently took the lead in the stand against paparazzi harassing and stalking celebrities' children in order to photograph them.

 More On: Robin Thicke |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– Robin Thicke is not messing around when it comes to winning estranged wife Paula Patton back: Asked about Patton in Washington, DC, yesterday, he told a TMZ photographer, "I'm just trying to get her back." He also denied that his raunchy VMA performance with Miley Cyrus had anything to do with the split, despite the fact that TMZ's sources say Patton felt "utterly disrespected" by it. Then, last night at his concert in Fairfax, Va., Thicke dedicated a song to Patton, TMZ reports. Thicke, who was wearing his wedding ring, told the audience, "For y'all that don't know, me and my wife separated, but I'm trying to get my girl back. She's a good woman." He said he wrote "Lost Without U" for her, and that it's her favorite song of his. He had to turn away from the audience at times and "even messed up on some of the words because he was crying," a concertgoer tells People. Also yesterday, someone sent a bunch of huge, pricey floral arrangements to Patton's home—TMZ has pictures, and assumes the flowers are from Thicke. But another source tells Us that whole Miley thing may have been a bigger deal than Thicke is letting on: "The Miley Cyrus fiasco was a big test of their relationship. He asked her to help him out as a friend and a wife, and defend him and the performance. He begged her to speak out for him and be there for him," the source says. "She agreed to be the good wife after he begged and pleaded. Then he asked her to stick with him through awards season, and she agreed. She attended the Grammys with him as a favor." Patton's 3-year-old son with Thicke was involved in a minor car accident yesterday while photographers were following Patton's car, which her mother and assistant were also in, ETOnline reports. No injuries were reported. (Patton, for what it's worth, hasn't been wearing her wedding ring.)


AP deletes Clinton tweet from two weeks ago

 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton (Photo: Brendan Smialowski, AFP/Getty Images)

 The Associated Press on Thursday deleted a tweet posted two weeks earlier regarding a review the news organization had conducted of meetings Hillary Clinton held with individuals from the private sector while secretary of State.

 The original tweet, posted on Aug. 23, read: "BREAKING: AP analysis: More than half those who met Clinton as Cabinet secretary gave money to Clinton Foundation."

 In its place, the AP tweeted Thursday: "AP review: Many of the discretionary meetings Clinton had at State were with people who gave to Clinton Foundation." The tweet included a link to the August story.

 AP review: Many of the discretionary meetings Clinton had at State were with people who gave to Clinton Foundation. https://t.co/ih6Oitgou2 — The Associated Press (@AP) September 8, 2016

 In a memo explaining the decision, John Daniszewski, vice president for standards for AP, wrote the original tweet "fell short of AP standards by omitting essential context."

 The story in question detailed how, among the individuals Clinton met with at the State Department who were outside of government, "an extraordinary proportion" had donated to her family's foundation personally or by way of some other entity — a finding, the AP wrote, that indicated "her possible ethics challenges if elected president."

 Specifically, the AP review found that 85 of the 154 people who'd had in-person or phone meetings scheduled with Clinton and who weren't government officials were also foundation contributors, according to the State Department calendars that were available.

 However, Daniszewski wrote Thursday, the tweet promoting the article "omitted the important distinction between discretionary meetings and official meetings."

 In other words, the now-deleted tweet gave the impression that a far higher percentage of Clinton's total meetings while secretary were with donors than was concluded by the story's analysis, given that the 154 people included in the review did not encompass the many government officials she was interacting with during her tenure, meetings that Daniszewski wrote "made up the bulk of her workday."

 Clinton and her campaign blasted the story not long after it was published. Speaking with CNN's Anderson Cooper last month, the Democratic presidential nominee said of the growing controversy regarding the relationship between the State Department under her leadership and the Clinton Foundation: "I know there is a lot of smoke and there is no fire."

 Of the AP report, Clinton said: "It draws a conclusion and makes a suggestion that my meetings with people like the late, great Elie Wiesel or Melinda Gates or the Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus were somehow due to connections with the foundation instead of their status as highly respected global leaders."

 Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said the AP "cherry-picked a limited subset of Secretary's Clinton's schedule to give a distorted portrayal of how often she crossed paths with individuals connected to charitable donations to the Clinton Foundation."

 The AP review included only the portion of Clinton's daily schedules it had acquired following a Freedom of Information Act request. Last week, the State Department said it would produce the remainder of Clinton's schedules by Oct. 17 after having previously said they would not be released until December, weeks after the election.

 The AP memo explaining the decision regarding the Clinton tweet also addressed the organization's new policy regarding the deletion of tweets, a practice it said was formally left to "AP news managers to decide on a case-by-case basis."

 “We have to be the AP, wherever our work is being distributed,” says executive editor Kathleen Carroll in the memo, which announced that messages on Twitter would now be given "the same internal review and response process as other AP content."

 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2caRo4C ||||| On Media Blog Archives Select Date… December, 2015 November, 2015 October, 2015 September, 2015 August, 2015 July, 2015 June, 2015 May, 2015 April, 2015 March, 2015 February, 2015 January, 2015

 The tweet in question linked to an investigation by the AP into how many Clinton Foundation donors also met with Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State. | Getty AP deletes Clinton Foundation tweet

 The Associated Press announced on Thursday that it is deleting a two-week old tweet about the Clinton Foundation.

 “The Associated Press today is deleting a 2-week-old tweet about Hillary Clinton’s meetings as Cabinet secretary after concluding the tweet fell short of AP standards by omitting essential context,” AP's vice president for standards John Daniszewski wrote in a blog post. “At the same time, we are revising our practices to require removal and correction of any AP tweets found not to meet AP standards, including tweets that contain information that is incorrect, misleading, unclear or could be interpreted as unfair, or having a problem in tone.”

 The tweet in question linked to an investigation by the AP into how many Clinton Foundation donors also met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state.

 “More than half those who met Clinton as Cabinet secretary gave money to Clinton Foundation,” the original tweet read in part.

 What the tweet didn’t mention was that the AP analysis focused only on Clinton’s discretionary meetings with those who were not in the U.S. federal government or representatives of foreign governments, which likely made up the vast majority of the people Clinton met with as secretary of tate (though we don't know that yet because the State Department has not released Clinton's schedules for her time as secretary, something the AP has been fighting for). The tweet, and in some cases the story, was slammed by some media critics and many on the left.

 The Clinton campaign initially formally requested the AP remove or amend the tweet, but spokesman Brian Fallon told POLITICO they hadn’t had further conversations with AP since their initial request.

 While AP’s executive editor, Kathleen Carroll, defended the report, she did admit in an interview with CNN last month that the tweet was “sloppy” but said wire service wasn’t going to change it.

 The two-week old tweet will now be replaced with one that reads “AP review: Many of the discretionary meetings Clinton had at State were with people who gave to Clinton Foundation.”

 “Prior to this guideline change, whether to delete or update tweets had been left to AP news managers to decide on a case-by-case basis. The new guidance is mandatory, subjecting tweets to the same internal review and response process as other AP content,” Daniszewski wrote. “In the earlier days of Twitter, there had been a belief that removing tweets was akin to retroactively editing a conversation; it wasn’t transparent. Additionally, tweets were seen more as providing paths to in-depth content and less as content in themselves that would remain in the public discussion for an extended period. Industry thinking on this topic has been changing. And the controversy over the AP tweet has led us to an extensive reflection on this evolution.” ||||| (CNN) Hillary Clinton slammed Donald Trump and issued a strong defense of the Clinton Foundation Wednesday amid the Republican nominee's claims that she used public office for personal gain.

 Speaking to CNN's Anderson Cooper in her first national news interview in nearly a month, Clinton pushed back against Trump's accusations and issued perhaps her most succinct answers on her use of a private email server during her time leading the State Department.

 "What Trump has said is ridiculous," Clinton said. "My work as secretary of state was not influenced by any outside forces. I made policy decisions based on what I thought was right."

 She added: "I know there's a lot of smoke, and there's no fire."

 Trump has recently upped his attacks on Clinton and her family's namesake foundation, saying that foreign governments and business leaders gave primarily to get something in return.

 "It is impossible to figure out where the Clinton Foundation ends and the State Department begins," Trump said Tuesday night at a rally in Austin, Texas. "The specific crimes committed to carry out that enterprise are too numerous to cover in this speech."

 'Unique circumstances'

 Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, has laid out some steps the foundation will take if his wife wins. It will only accept donations from US citizens, legal residents and US-based independent foundations, and the 42nd president will step down from the board and stop fundraising.

 Asked by Cooper about why she is waiting until a possible presidency to make the changes rather than implement them immediately, Clinton said, "Obviously, there will be some unique circumstances."

 "Didn't those unique circumstances exist when you were secretary of state?" Cooper interjected.

 "No, no, look -- I know there is a lot of smoke and there is no fire," Clinton replied, before blasting an Associated Press report out this week that said more than half of the private citizens with whom she met while at the State Department donated to the foundation.

 "It draws a conclusion and makes a suggestion that my meetings with people like the late, great Elie Wiesel or Melinda Gates or the Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus were somehow due to connections with the foundation instead of their status as highly respected global leaders," Clinton continued. "That is absurd. These are people I would be proud to meet with, as would any secretary of state would have been proud to meet with, to hear about their work and their insights."

 Pushback from Powell

 Clinton has reportedly told FBI investigators that her use of the private server was inspired by former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who has pushed back against the suggestion , saying, "Her people have been trying to pin it on me."

 Cooper asked the Democratic nominee about the disparity in the two former diplomats' claims.

 JUST WATCHED Hillary Clinton's many earlier explanations of her email saga Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Hillary Clinton's many earlier explanations of her email saga 02:47

 "I am not going to relitigate in public my private conversation with him," Clinton replied. "I have been asked many, many questions in the past year about emails and what I have learned is that when I try to explain what happened, it can sound like I am trying to excuse what I did. And there are no excuses. I want people to know that the decision to have a single email account was mine. I take responsibly for it. I apologize for it. I would certainly do differently if I could."

 She added, "I believe the public will be and is considering my full record and experience as they consider their choice for president."

 Clinton's faced some criticism even among Democrats who have criticized her response to email scrutiny. David Axelrod, a former Obama senior adviser and CNN contributor, said jokes Clinton about the issue on ABC's Jimmy Kimmel earlier this week fell flat.

 "I think she should not joke about this. She's done this a few times. She seemed flippant about it. Obviously there are concerns about how she handled these emails and all these jokes fall flat and it makes it seem as if she's not taking the issue seriously," Axelrod told CNN's "New Day" on Wednesday. |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– After more than two weeks of controversy, the Associated Press has deleted an Aug. 23 tweet about the Clinton Foundation that critics—including Hillary Clinton—said was misleading. "More than half those who met Clinton as Cabinet secretary gave money to Clinton Foundation," read the tweet. Politico notes that the tweet failed to mention that the AP's analysis of Clinton meetings looked only at discretionary meetings and not meetings with federal officials or representatives of foreign governments, which tend to make up the majority of any secretary of state's meetings. "The tweet fell short of AP standards by omitting essential context," AP VP for Standards John Daniszewski writes in a blog post, setting out a new policy for removing tweets, an action that the AP used to see as "retroactively editing a conversation." Clinton and her campaign slammed the tweet and the Clinton Foundation story soon after it appeared, USA Today reports. "It draws a conclusion and makes a suggestion that my meetings with people like the late, great Elie Wiesel or Melinda Gates or the Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus were somehow due to connections with the foundation instead of their status as highly respected global leaders," Clinton told CNN last month.


Here is a news article: DENVER (AP) — A man who lives near Oprah Winfrey's new property above Telluride, Colorado, is suing her for allegedly blocking access to hiking trails open to neighbors for decades.

 Retired physicist Charles D. Goodman claims Winfrey's Yellow Brick Road company, the property's former owners and the town of Mountain Village made a secret deal to close access to the trails that cut across the land purchased for $10.9 million in March.

 The Denver Post (http://bit.ly/1v9yiQQ ) reported Thursday that the former owners, Hoyt and Carol Barnett, asked for a correction to property records shortly before selling the land.

 Goodman claims that erased easements allowing residents of nearby homes to use the trails.

 Mountain Village denies the accusation. Town community development director Chirs Hawkins said the correction only cleared up ambiguities and that the town and Winfrey's team want to continue to allow trail access.

 In a written statement, Yellow Brick Road spokeswoman Wendy Luckenbill said the company will continue to work with the neighbors ensure "reasonable" access for neighbors over portions of the land.

 The trails were established in 1989 after negotiations between Goodman and the U.S. Forest Service, which owned the land at the time.

 Winfrey plans to build a mansion and guest home on the property starting this summer. Plans for the homes haven't been submitted yet but the project will require building a bridge over a ski run and cutting down an estimated 800 to 1,000 trees to comply with the town's wildfire mitigation policies.

 ___

 Information from: The Denver Post, http://www.denverpost.com ||||| Katherine Heigl once had an extremely promising career, starring on “Grey’s Anatomy” and in a number of (shitty) rom-coms, but she hasn’t been able to get a job recently thanks to the terrible reputation she and her manager mom have for their diva-like demands. I don’t think her latest headline-making stunt is going to win her any fans — she’s suing Duane Reade drugstores for six million dollars because they tweeted the above photo. I guess her argument is that they used her image to promote their stores without her permission and without paying her, which isn’t okay because she is “a highly successful television and motion picture actress, producer and celebrity” in “high demand.” RECORD SCRATCH. Have a stadium full of seats, Katie Heigl. Highly successful TV and movie actresses don’t need to sue drug store chains because they tweeted a photo. Also, I’m pretty sure Katherine Heigl isn’t worth six million. Ugh, this lawsuit gives me secondhand embarrassment like whoa. [TMZ]

 We like in a litigious country so this is of course not the only totally stupid and ridiculous lawsuit related to a celeb’s name and image. Here are a few more… |||||
A summary of this is?

– Oprah Winfrey—a bad neighbor? That's what one man who lives near her new property above Telluride, Colorado, seems to think. Retired physicist Charles D. Goodman is suing Winfrey, claiming the property blocks access to hiking trails that were previously open to locals. Goodman says Winfrey and the prior owners of the property made a secret deal with the town of Mountain Village to erase easements that have, for decades, allowed nearby residents to use the trails, before Oprah bought the property in March. A rep for Winfrey's company says the company plans to allow "reasonable" access. Winfrey joins these six other celebrities involved in somewhat odd lawsuits: Taylor Swift is being sued ... over a number. Lucky 13, a clothing line, doesn't want Swift using the phrase "Lucky 13" on her own official merchandise. It's a bummer for Swift, who has long held that 13 is her lucky number. "Basically, whenever a 13 comes up in my life, it’s a good thing," she once said. But not this time, apparently. Katherine Heigl is suing a drugstore for a whopping $6 million, and all over a tweet. The actress isn't happy that Duane Reade tweeted a picture of her carrying two shopping bags from the store along with the line, "Even @KatieHeigl can’t resist shopping #NYC's favorite drugstore." Britney Spears is being sued by a backup dancer who says that a "disheveled and confused" Spears, who was having trouble mastering the choreography for a music video, suddenly started twirling "in an unbalanced and reckless manner" and ended up smacking the dancer and breaking her nose. Nicki Minaj is being sued by her former wig stylist, who claims the rapper stole his wig designs and is now selling them as her own. Alanis Morissette is suing her housekeeper; the musician claims the woman stole her dog after becoming overly attached to it while Alanis and her husband were traveling. Last year, LeAnn Rimes sued her dentist, claiming he did such poor work that he caused "permanent cosmetic deficiency" and harmed her career. Click for eight more weird lawsuits involving celebrities.


Summarize this article:

The USGA is apologizing for Fox Sports’s U.S. Open broadcast yesterday, which featured two men talking about violent sex:

 “We deeply regret the inappropriate language and sentiment expressed by a few fans that was unfortunately picked up by a microphone on the course during today’s broadcast,” said spokeswoman Janeen Driscoll in a statement to Sporting News. “We are working closely with our partners at Fox Sports to address this issue.”

 That inappropriate language, as best we can tell:

 “That’s my ex.” “Yeah, she’s hot.” “That’s when I—I was fucking her so hard and I headbutted her in the head and I smacked that bitch [something]. We went and kinda got in the [muppets?] position and she sat up.”

 Advertisement

 We’re sure Fox Sports will respond to this in a timely manner, right? ||||| UPDATE:

 The United States Golf Association said it "deeply regrets" rough sex talk that was inadvertently aired to millions of TV viewers during Fox Sports' coverage of the U.S. Open Friday.

 "We deeply regret the inappropriate language and sentiment expressed by a few fans that was unfortunately picked up by a microphone on the course during today's broadcast," said spokeswoman Janeen Driscoll in a statement to Sporting News. "We are working closely with our partners at Fox Sports to address this issue."

 PREVIOUS:

 What an embarrassment for Fox Sports, the U.S. Open and United States Golf Association.

 Fox Sports is profusely apologizing for inadvertently broadcasting rough sex talk between two U.S. Open fans Friday at Shinnecock Hills Golf Club. The offensive chatter was picked up by one of Fox's 200-plus, omnipresent on-course microphones, then mistakenly broadcast to millions of TV viewers watching FS1's coverage of Round 2 of the 2018 U.S. Open.

 "Today, during the live FS1 broadcast of the 2018 U.S. Open, one of the many microphones on the course inadvertently picked up some offensive crowd chatter. We sincerely apologize," Fox Sports spokeswoman Anne Pennington said in a statement to Sporting News.

 When SN asked Pennington if the offensive audio came from fans on the course or a radio mixup, Pennington confirmed it came from the gallery.

 The conversation, involving an unidentified man bragging about how he violently head-butted his "bitch" ex, was captured by Awful Announcing. (WARNING: The link goes to an article containing extremely graphic and NSFW audio.)

 Fox's Joe Buck was discussing Masters winner Patrick Reed when Fox's viewers suddenly heard two new voices discussing sex. After they had finished, Buck came back on the air as if nothing had happened.

 To cap Fox's freaky Friday, the audio cut out for eight minutes during its afternoon coverage from the historic course in Southampton, N.Y., on Long Island. To his credit, Buck handled the sound snafu with aplomb, noting: "The reviews are in. We've never sounded better."

 During its first four years of USGA coverage, Fox has liberally sprinkled on-course microphones around the greens, tee boxes, fairways and galleries to bring viewers the sights and sounds of a U.S. Open.

 But Sporting News warned Thursday that some of the gavones in the loud, proud New York crowd would give Fox more audio than it could handle:

 "It's hard to blame Fox for spectators running their yaps. That's more of a USGA issue. Most of us have been stuck in crowds with bozos who think they're hilarious, and crowds at major sporting events have become louder, drunker and more in-your-face over the years. Still, the mics picking up these gavones hurt the broadcast. As a viewer, I found it distracting to hear that stuff on nearly every hole, every shot."

 The next question is how the strait-laced, white-shoe crowd at the USGA will react to its premier event being sullied by Fox's X-rated, misogynistic audio.

 We'll see this weekend. |||||

– The US Open broadcast on Fox Sports took a strange turn Friday when a microphone inadvertently picked up a guy bragging about rough sex with his "ex," the Sporting News reports. Announcer Joe Buck was setting up a shot by golfer Patrick Reed at around 1:45pm EST when the surprise voices emerged. "Here at one, it's Patrick Reed," said Buck, and a mic picked up a man talking to his male companion, per Awful Announcing. "We were ---ing so hard, and I headbutted her in the head," the man said, among other things, but the other doesn't sound convinced: "Yeah, what actually happened, pal?" The first one protests, "No, straight up..." and his words soon turn indistinct. Buck's voice returned with "second shot," as if all was normal, and the broadcast continued. "From the sound, it seems likely this was a radio conversation that somehow got picked up onto the actual feed, rather than just crowd chatter, but we don’t know for sure," says Awful Announcing. (You can hear the actual exchange at Deadspin.) Now Fox Sports and the United States Golf Association are apologizing for the unexpected interlude. "We deeply regret the inappropriate language and sentiment expressed by a few fans that was unfortunately picked up by a microphone," says a USGA spokeswoman.


Here is a news article: Ricky Gervais promised to offend Hollywood. He did not disappoint.

 The actor-comic opened the 73rd annual Golden Globes by mocking Sean Penn, Caitlyn Jenner, Roman Polanski, Jennifer Lawrence, Jeffrey Tambor, Ben Affleck, and many more.

 Here is a rundown of the bluntly sarcastic four-time host’s funniest and/or most offensive lines from the Beverly Hilton — including what Gervais said to Mel Gibson that was entirely bleeped by NBC:

 — “You disgusting, pill-popping, sexual deviant scum. I’m going to do this monologue and then go into hiding. Not even Sean Penn will find me … snitch.”

 — “You’re global megastars with amazing talent. Most of you. Some of you just married well. You know who are you. We all do.”

 — “It’s right that NBC should host this award show. They’re the only network that’s truly fair and impartial and that’s because they’re the only network with zero nominations. So … nothing in it for ‘em tonight. They don’t care, obviously.”

 — “I’m going to be nice tonight. I’ve changed — not as much as Bruce Jenner. Obviously. Now Caitlyn Jenner, of course. What a year she’s had! She became a role model for trans-people everywhere, showing great bravery in breaking down barriers and destroying stereotypes. She didn’t do a lot for women drivers. But you can’t have everything, can ya? Not at the same time.”

 — “One publication said me hosting would mean some film stars would stay away for fear of being made fun of. As if film stars would stay away from a chance of getting a Golden Globe — particularly if their film company has already paid for it.”

 — “The excellent Spotlight has been nominated. Yeah. The Catholic Church are furious about the film as it it exposes that 5 percent of all their priests have repeatedly molested children and been allowed to continue to work without punishment. Roman Polanski called it ‘the best date movie ever.’”

 — “Jennifer Lawrence made the news when she demanded equal pay for women in Hollywood. She received overwhelming support from people everywhere. There were marches on the street with nurses and factory workers saying, ‘How the hell can a 25-year-old live on $52 million?!’”

 — “Of course woman should be paid the same as men for doing the same job. And I’d like to say now, I’m being paid exactly the same as [what Tina Fey and Amy Poehler received] last year. No, I know there were two of them, but it’s not my fault if they want to share the money, is it? That’s their stupid fault. It’s funny because it’s true.”

 — “The Hollywood Foreign Press deemed The Martian a comedy and even nominated it. And hence, Matt Damon is here tonight. So that worked a treat, didn’t it? To be fair, The Martian was a lot funnier than Pixels. But then again, so was Schindler’s List.“

 — “All-female remakes are the big thing. There’s a female remake of Ghostbusters. There’s going to be a female remake of Ocean’s 11. And this is brilliant for the studios because they get guaranteed box office results and they don’t have to spend too much money on the cast.”

 — “The president of the Hollywood Foreign Press said if I say anything offensive, or crass, or resort to innuendo, he’s going to personally come out here and ‘pull me off.’ So that’s an offer I couldn’t refuse. Yes, yes, that is the level — an old man pulling me off. Again. At least Jeffrey Tambor did it in a dress.”

 — “Remember if you do win tonight, no one cares about that award as much as you do. Don’t get emotional, it’s embarrassing. That award is, no offense, worthless. It’s a bit of metal some nice old confused journalists wanted to give you in person so they could meet you and have a selfie with you, okay? That’s all it is!”

 — “I won three Golden Globes myself … one I keep by the bed to — it doesn’t matter why, it’s mine. I won it fair and square. It’s just the right shape and size, it’s nothing… yeah. To be clear: That was a joke about me shoving Golden Globes that I’ve won up my ass.”

 — On introducing presenter Matt Damon: “He’s the only person Ben Affleck hasn’t been unfaithful to.”

 — On introducing Eva Longoria and America Ferrera: “Two people who your future president, Donald Trump, can’t wait to deport.”

 — On the films Joy and Trainwreck. “No, not the names of Charlie Sheen’s favorite hookers. The movies of these next two presenters.”

 — On introducing Mel Gibson after his infamous takedown of the actor during the Globes in 2010: “I’m in the awkward position of having to introduce him again. Listen, I’m sure it’s embarrassing for both of us. I blame NBC for this terrible situation. Mel blames…we know who Mel blames. Listen, I still feel a bit bad for it. Mel’s forgotten all about it apparently, that’s what drinking does. I want to say something nice about Mel before he comes out. So: I’d rather have a drink with him in his hotel room tonight than with Bill Cosby.” Then after Gibson came out on stage, Gervais asked him — and this was entirely bleeped by NBC: “What the f–k does ‘sugar t-ts’ even mean?’”

 RELATED: Full Globes winners list

 Before the ceremony, Gervais tweeted a shirtless photo of himself with a profane message warning that he would offend Hollywood on Sunday night. And on the red carpet before the telecast from the Beverly Hilton Hotel, Gervais confirmed to Matt Lauer that his Globes bosses gave him free reign: “They said I could say what I want — NBC and the Hollywood Foreign Press. I don’t think they know what that means. I won’t break any laws.”

 RELATED: All the Red Carpet Arrivals from the 2016 Golden Globes

 For more, here’s EW’s Golden Globes live blog, our red carpet photo gallery and the full list of winners. ||||| Getty

 Say hello to your 2016 Golden Globes host! As movie and television fanatics alike gear up for one of the most exciting award shows of the year, some might not be too familiar with this year’s host, Ricky Gervais. Never fear — we have five fast facts for you right here!

 Unlike some award show hosts, Ricky Gervais, 54, isn’t the most household name in America. But considering the British comedian has such a major role in the 2016 Golden Globes as the night’s host, that could very well change! Despite the fact that he has hosted before, Golden Globe devotees might need to know a little more about who will be running the show on Jan. 10. Get to know Ricky below!

 1. He has hosted the Golden Globes the most times.

 This year’s Golden Globes will be Ricky’s fourth time hosting, giving him a leg up on the three-time hosts Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. He also served as the master of ceremonies in 2010, 2011, and 2012. Because of his crude jokes that often involve celebrities in the audience, his returns have always been deemed controversial.

 2. He isn’t afraid to throw shade — and Robert Downey Jr. isn’t exactly a fan of it.

 Ricky is known for having a dark sense of humor as it is, but during his second Golden Globes hosting gig in 2011, he totally dissed Robert when introducing the actor. He listed off some of Robert’s movies before making a pretty personal slam: “He has done all those films, but many of you in this room know him best from such facilities as the Betty Ford Clinic and Los Angeles County Jail.” Even though Robert called him out for being “mean-spirited,” Ricky outwardly said he isn’t sorry!

 3. He used to be a pop star.

 Well, not quite. After attending college, Ricky attempted to start a career as a singer with a pop duo called Seona Dancing. Although the group landed a recording contract and released two singles, Ricky’s pop career didn’t last long as the group failed to gain much attention.

 Join Amazon Prime For Free – Thousands of Movies & Shows Anytime

 4. He was the original Michael Scott from The Office.

 Ricky’s acting career really took off after he starred in a UK series of the same name beginning in 2001, which actually inspired the American remake because of its success overseas. He played office manager David Brent, whom Steve Carell‘s character is based off of. In fact, he’s a co-creator of both versions of the show!

 Stream music, completely unlimited and ad-free, RIGHT HERE

 5. He has actually won a Golden Globe himself.

 Years before taking the stage as host, Ricky took home the award for Best Performance by an Actor in a Television Series – Musical or Comedy in 2004 for his Office role as David Brent. He was also nominated for the same award in 2008 and 2015, but for his roles in Extras and Derek, respectively.

 HollywoodLifers, are you glad Ricky is this year’s Golden Globes host?

 JavaScript is required to load the comments. ||||| Mel Gibson allegedly ranted against "wetbacks" on tape. Previous tirades include the N-word and anti-Semitism. Wouldn't it be nice if you could read every terrible thing Gibson has said, all in one place? Look no further. Updated with more quotes!

 We have compiled the Bible of terrible Mel Gibson quotes. (And Mel Gibson loves Bibles, because "there is no salvation for those outside the Church.") We're sure he's said more and worse. These are merely the terrible things he's said near an open microphone, tapped telephone, police officer, or journalist:

 "I will report her to the fucking people that take fucking money from the wetbacks." — phone conversation with ex-girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva, about an employee, via Update: a href="http://gawker.com/5585841/third-horrifying-mel-gibson-phone-call-is-now-online">Listen to it here.

 "You look like a fucking pig in heat, and if you get raped by a pack of niggers, it will be your fault." — phone conversation with Grigorieva, via Update: "Pig in heat" or "bitch in heat"? Listen to it here.

 "I am going to come and burn the fucking house down... but you will blow me first." — phone conversation with Grigorieva, via Update: Listen to it here.

 "You know what, you fucking deserved it." — to Grigorieva after she asked, "What kind of man is that who would hit a woman when she is holding a child in her hands, hitting her twice in the face?" via Update: Listen to it here.

 "Fucking Jews... The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world… Are you a Jew?" — to male police officer during 2006 DUI arrest, via

 "What do you think you're looking at, sugar tits?" — to female police officer during 2006 DUI arrest, via

 "I want to kill him…I want his intestines on a stick… I want to kill his dog." —on New York Times reporter Frank Rich, who criticized The Passion of the Christ, to The New Yorker in 2003, via, h/t

 "I own Malibu… I am going to fuck you." — to arresting officer during 2006 DUI, via

 "Look what you did to me... look what you are... look what every part of you is... fucking fake... fucking fake… You are the most synthetic person... who the fuck are you?" — phone conversation with Grigorieva, via

 "They take it up the ass. [laughs, stands up, bends over, points to anus] This is only for taking a shit." —to Spanish newspaper El Pais when asked what he thinks of gays, in 1991, via

 "With this look, who's going to think I'm gay? I don't lend myself to that type of confusion. Do I look like a homosexual? Do I talk like them? Do I move like them?" —from the El Pais interview, via

 "I'll apologize when hell freezes over. They can fuck off." —to Playboy in 1995, about whether he'd issue an apology to gays and lesbians, as GLAAD recommended

 "I am one tough motherfucker and you can't bother me anymore. You ask anybody what their number one fear is and it's public humiliation. Multiply that on a global scale and that's what I've been through. It changes you and makes you one tough motherfucker. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger." — interview with The Telegraph and perhaps the most frightening quote of all, explaining why, no matter how much we abhor, ridicule, and shun this man, we will never be able to get rid of him.

 Related

 Mel Gibson's Horrifying Phone Call Is Now Online

 'My Career Is Over': Another Terrifying Mel Gibson Phone Call Is Now Online

 Third Horrifying Mel Gibson Phone Call Is Now Online

 'I'll Burn the Goddamn House Down, But Blow Me First': Mel Gibson Gets Creative in His Latest Rant

 [Photo via Getty Images] ||||| The seed for this crawl was a list of every host in the Wayback Machine

 This crawl was run at a level 1 (URLs including their embeds, plus the URLs of all outbound links including their embeds)

 The WARC files associated with this crawl are not currently available to the general public. |||||
A summary of this is?

– Sunday night marked Ricky Gervais' fourth time hosting the Golden Globes—more times than anyone else, even Tina Fey and Amy Poehler—and he's also been the most controversial. Why stars and show producers have always been nervous: Gervais isn't "afraid to throw shade," as Hollywood Life puts it (and a NSFW tweet he posted Sunday afternoon shows he wasn't exactly going in afraid to offend). So what came out of his mouth at this year's show? After showing up at the podium with a pint in hand and calling the audience a bunch of "disgusting, pill-popping, sexual deviant scum," Ricky Gervais confessed he wanted to go into hiding after doing the monologue and that "not even Sean Penn will find me. Snitch." He followed that up with a promise that he'd be nicer this time around, adding, "I've changed. Not as much as Bruce Jenner, obviously." Gervais couldn't resist sneaking in some topical American humor. "Eva Longoria and America Ferrera aren't just beautiful, talented actresses," he noted. "They're also two people that your future president, Donald Trump, can't wait to deport." He stuck to his promise to "bite the hand that feeds me. "That award is, no offense, worthless," he told nominees. "It's a bit of metal that some nice old confused journalists wanted to give you in person so they could meet you and have a selfie with you." Along those same lines, per Entertainment Weekly: "It's right that NBC should host this award show. They're the only network that's truly fair and impartial and that's because they're the only network with zero nominations." "He's been the only person Ben Affleck hasn't been unfaithful to," he said before calling Matt Damon to the stage, per the Telegraph. About women not getting paid as much as men in Hollywood: "I'm being paid exactly the same as [what Tina Fey and Amy Poehler received] last year. No, I know there were two of them, but it's not my fault if they want to share the money, is it? That's their stupid fault." NBC bleeped out what Gervais said to Mel Gibson during their head-to-head, but EW says he noted: "What the f--k does 'sugar t-ts' even mean?"—a phrase Gibson reportedly used during a 2006 arrest. Here are the night's big winners.


Summarize this article:

J. K. Rowling had more magic up her sleeve after all.

 Mulholland Books 'Robert Galbraith' is a pseudonym.

 Over the weekend the Sunday Times (London) disclosed that she is the author of "The Cuckoo's Calling," a well-reviewed crime novel issued in April under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith.

 The book, which features a private investigator named Cormoran Strike, who lost a leg in Afghanistan, quickly zoomed up the charts Sunday after Ms. Rowling was identified as the writer. The author had originally been described as having served in the military, where his experiences helped shape the novel.

 The book was published in the U.S. by Mulholland Books, an imprint of Lagardère SCA's Hachette Book Group, and by a sister imprint in the U.K.

 By early Sunday afternoon, the physical edition ranked No. 1 at Barnes & Noble Inc.'s online store and at Amazon.com Inc. in the U.S. A Barnes & Noble spokeswoman described the title as a slow seller until Ms. Rowling was identified as the author.

 After J.K. Rowling was unmasked as Robert Galbraith, the author of "The Cuckoo's Calling," the book quickly zoomed up the charts. Jeffrey Trachtenberg reports on Lunch Break. Photo: Getty Images.

 By late Sunday afternoon, "The Cuckoo's Calling" was temporarily out of stock online at BarnesandNoble.com, while Amazon said that the title "usually ships within 10 to 14 days." A spokeswoman for Barnes & Noble noted there is still "some availability" in stores."

 Mulholland will publish a second book in the series next summer, said Reagan Arthur, publisher of Hachette's Little, Brown & Co., in a prepared statement. She also said that "The Cuckoo's Calling" is being reprinted and that the edition will state that Robert Galbraith is a pseudonym for J.K. Rowling.

 An independent retailer in the Midwest said she understood Ms. Rowling's desire for a clean slate. "I think she did this so that she could write freely without expectations from her audience," said Sarah Bagby, owner of Watermark Books & Café in Wichita, Kan., which stocked the book when it came out in April.

 A spokeswoman for Ms. Rowling confirmed the author's identity via an email but declined further comment.

 Ms. Rowling is best known for her wildly popular seven Harry Potter novels, all of which were made into films. Although her first adult novel, "The Casual Vacancy," received mixed reviews last fall, it proved popular with readers.

 On Sunday, Michael Pietsch, chief executive of the Hachette Book Group, said "The Casual Vacancy" has sold more than a million hardcover copies in North America since publication and was the group's biggest selling hardcover title in 2012.

 Earlier this year, a "rich list" published by the Sunday Times, which like The Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp, estimated Ms. Rowling's fortune at £560 million ($846 million).

 The Harry Potter series has sold more than 450 million physical copies world-wide, according to Scholastic Corp., which publishes the books in the U.S. Scholastic is in the process of issuing new fancy paperbacks with new cover illustrations.

 Write to Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg at jeffrey.trachtenberg@wsj.com

 A version of this article appeared July 15, 2013, on page B1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Poof! It's J.K. Rowling. ||||| (CNN) -- "Harry Potter" creator J.K. Rowling donned an invisibility cloak of her own for her new novel.

 In top-secret fashion, she published "The Cuckoo's Calling" under the name Robert Galbraith. Her publisher, Mulholland Books -- an imprint of Little, Brown and Company -- described the author as a former member of the Special Investigative Branch of the Royal Military Police.

 "He left the military in 2003 and has been working since then in the civilian security industry," the publisher's website said. "The idea for (protagonist) Cormoran Strike grew directly out of his own experiences and those of his military friends who returned to the civilian world. 'Robert Galbraith' is a pseudonym."

 The Sunday Times, curious about who this mystery novelist really was, connected the dots -- noting that "he" used an agent, editor and publisher who had worked with Rowling.

 "I hoped to keep this secret a little longer, because being Robert Galbraith has been such a liberating experience!" Rowling said in a statement. "It has been wonderful to publish without hype or expectation and pure pleasure to get feedback from publishers and readers under a different name.

 Social class, swearing and sex permeate Rowling's 'Casual Vacancy'

 "The upside of being rumbled is that I can publicly thank my editor David Shelley, who has been a true partner in crime, all those people at Little, Brown who have been working so hard on 'The Cuckoo's Calling' without realizing that I wrote it, and the writers and reviewers, both in the newspapers and online, who have been so generous to the novel.

 "And to those who have asked for a sequel, Robert fully intends to keep writing the series, although he will probably continue to turn down personal appearances."

 Rowling's daring leap

 While the novel received praise before the secret was out, the disclosure that Rowling was the author -- to little surprise -- skyrocketed the book's sales.

 Reagan Arthur, publisher of Little, Brown and Company. said a reprint of the book is underway and will carry a revised author biography that reads 'Robert Galbraith is a pseudonym for J. K. Rowling.' "

 On Amazon.com, sales soared more than 507,000% after Rowling acknowledged being the author.

 The fast facts on J. K. Rowling

 CNN's Lindsay Isaac and Joseph Netto contributed to this report. ||||| (Photo Credit: John Bazemore / AP Photo)

 If you lie about being awarded military honors for profit, you can now be subject to criminal prosecution, according to a new law signed by President Obama today.

 The Stolen Valor Act of 2013, introduced in January by Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.), "makes it a Federal crime for an individual to fraudulently hold oneself out to be a recipient of any of several specified military decorations or medals with the intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit," the White House said today, announcing the signing.

 The law was the latest attempt by the government to help protect real military heroes from phonies. The original iteration of the bill, the Stolen Valor Act of 2005, had been in effect for six years before the Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional.

 At the time, the law was written to say it was a crime simply to lie about military service and awards - a broad characterization the Supreme Court said violated a person's First Amendment right to free speech.

 READ: Stolen Valor 'More Than Just Lying,' SEAL Watchdog Says

 A new version of the bill, introduced by Heck in late 2012, narrowed the act to say the liar must be attempting to somehow materially profit from the lies, making the would-be crime more akin to fraud. A tweaked version of that bill was reintroduced in 2013.

 President Obama took a hard stance against military phonies last year when he announced a new government website to track awards for legitimate heroes.

 "It may no longer be a crime for con artists to pass themselves off as heroes, but one thing is certain - it is contemptible," he said in reference to the Supreme Court's ruling in 2012. "…[N]o American hero should ever have their valor stolen."

 CLICK HERE to visit the Department of Defense's website listing the top military honor winners. |||||

– JK Rowling embarked on quite the flight of fancy when inventing her pseudonym Robert Galbraith—and that might prove controversial. Galbraith's bio claims that he spent "several years with the Royal Military Police" and that the protagonist of his novel—one-legged Afghanistan veteran Cormoran Strike—"grew directly out of his own experiences and those of his military friends." Indeed, Rowling created a full backstory for her alter ego, who apparently eventually found himself in the RMP's plain-clothes Special Investigative Branch, before leaving for the civilian security industry. While so far Rowling's invention appears to be flying under the radar, fake military service claims often prove contentious. In the US, it's even illegal to profit from them, thanks to the new Stolen Valor Act, which was signed into law last month to replace an earlier version struck down by the Supreme Court. Then again, Rowling probably could have profited more without the pseudonym; since the reveal, sales of The Cuckoo's Calling exploded 507,000% at Amazon, reports CNN, and it's now out of stock online at both Amazon and Barnes and Noble. (A rep for the latter told the Wall Street Journal it wasn't a big seller pre-reveal.) A new edition is coming that will acknowledge Galbraith as a pseudonym for Rowling.


Here is a news article: KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine (AP) — Former President George H.W. Bush has been released from a Maine hospital after falling at his summer home and breaking a bone in his neck.

 (Click Prev or Next to continue viewing images.)

 ADVERTISEMENT (Click Prev or Next to continue viewing images.)

 FILE- In this March 29, 2015, file photo, former President George H.W. Bush and his wife Barbara Bush speak before the first half of an NCAAA college basketball game in Houston. A spokesman says doctors... (Associated Press)

 Bush spokesman Jim McGrath said that "a very grateful" Bush returned home Sunday from Maine Medical Center after four days of treatment for a fractured vertebra.

 Doctors say Bush didn't suffer nerve damage when he fell at his home in Kennebunkport on Wednesday.

 Doctors said they anticipate the 41st president will recover fully in three or four months.

 Bush has a form of Parkinson's disease and uses a motorized scooter or a wheelchair for mobility. The 91-year-old is the oldest living former president.

 The Republican served two terms as Ronald Reagan's vice president before being elected president in 1988. ||||| Former President George H. W. Bush was discharged from the Maine Medical Center in Portland today, four days after he fell at his Maine home, a family spokesman said.

 Interested in ? Add as an interest to stay up to date on the latest news, video, and analysis from ABC News. Add Interest

 Bush was treated for a fractured vertebrae, spokesman Jim McGrath said.

 A very grateful President @GeorgeHWBush was discharged today from @MaineMed after four days of treatment for a fractured vertebrae. — Jim McGrath (@jgm41) July 19, 2015

 The former president was taken to the hospital Wednesday after he fell at his summer home in Kennebunkport. On Saturday, McGrath tweeted that Bush was in good spirits and his doctors were very pleased with his progress.

 The type of fracture that Bush sustained usually takes three to four months to heal, attending physician Dr. William D'Angelo said.

 A statement released Thursday from Bush’s office said that "the president never lost consciousness, and the injury he sustained neither impinged on his spine nor resulted in any neurological deficits." According to the statement, Bush will not need surgery but will be in a neck brace for "at least a couple of months." |||||
A summary of this is?

– Four days after he entered the hospital rather abruptly with a broken neck bone suffered in a fall, former President George HW Bush—at an apparently sprightly 91 years of age—has left the hospital in Portland, Maine, reports ABC News. "A very grateful President @GeorgeHWBush was discharged today," tweeted a rep. Bush had fallen at his vacation home in Kennebunkport on Wednesday. The injury, a fractured vertabra, is expected to take three to four months to heal, and Bush will be in a neck brace. A full recovery is expected, notes the AP.