As a record crowd looked on, the space shuttle Atlantis landed softly at Kennedy Space Center on July 21, 2011, marking the final shuttle mission for NASA and ending the 30-year program.

The idea for the reusable spacecraft was hatched in 1972, during the Nixon administration. It was intended to become part of a shuttle space station, with hopes of a possible future human trip to Mars.

Atlantis's final voyage, mission Space Transportation System-135 (STS-135), had a crew of four that delivered a stockpile of supplies and parts to the International Space Station.

"I think the shuttle program is ending exactly as it should," said Program Launch Integration Manager Mike Moses. "We've built the International Space Station; we're stocking it up for the future and ready to hand it off -- and we finish really, really strong."

Triumphs, crises
Over the years and hundreds of flights, the fleet of five shuttles built the largest structure in space (the International Space Station) and transported astronauts to and from it. Shuttle crews also repaired the space station, captured wayward satellites, launched the Hubble Space Telescope, and conducted numerous scientific experiments. The overall cost of the program is estimated to have been $209 billion.

But the program yielded much more than space shots and space walks. More than 1,700 NASA technologies have influenced U.S. industries and generated hundreds of spinoffs we use in everyday life, including longer-lasting tires, improved cell phone camera technology, and lightweight home insulation.

The shuttle era will also be remembered for its two tragedies.

Challenger was destroyed 73 seconds after takeoff on January 28, 1986. Rubber O-ring seals failed and caused an explosion, killing its crew of seven, including teacher and astronaut Christa McAuliffe.

Columbia disintegrated during re-entry on February 1, 2003. A chunk of foam insulation had broken off from an external tank during launch, damaging a protective heat shield on one of the shuttle's wings. The damage caused the destruction of the spacecraft as it returned to Earth, killing all seven aboard.

The catastrophes and the the high cost of the program -- calculated by the Obama administration at 7 cents per American per day -- may have led to a cut in funding.

Another possible reason for the cut: American people may no longer have an appetite for the risk of failure.

Historical relics
The remaining three shuttles, now retired, are slated to be housed in museums: Atlantis at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex in Cape Canaveral, Florida; Discovery at the National Air and Space Museum at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.; and Endeavor at the California Science Center in Los Angeles.

The International Space Station will be serviced primarily by the Russian Federal Space Agency's Soyuz spacecraft. Some suggest that Russian has the advantage to become the absolute leader in space. However, there's a strong chance that China is poised to take over the top spot in manned space flights. And still others claim the U.S. still leads in space exploration.

As for NASA, they are hoping that private firms step up to commercialize flights to the space station, as well as considering manned trips to Mars. Boeing has thrown its hat in the ring, saying the company could offer passenger trips to the International Space Station by 2015. A project called Space Adventures aims to offer trips around the moon, and Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic is already testing two suborbital crafts.

NASA, on the other hand, plans to develop a deep-space rocket to go beyond the range of the shuttle; the program is awaiting Congressional funding.

A recent poll of Americans showed that 52% thought the shuttle program was worth its costs; 59% agreed that the space program would be better off if it got "out of Washington" and cut the bureaucracy.

So, the space shuttles are forever grounded, and the future of the space program is up in the air.

Ron Recinto is the Detroit editor for Yahoo! Local. Prior to joining Yahoo!, Ron was a print journalist and an online editor for more than 15 years at publications including the Detroit Free Press, the Charlotte Observer, and Red Herring magazine.

Oprah Winfrey's decision to pull the plug on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" was a long time coming. Though the final episode made for a sad day for her gazillions of die-hard fans, it was hardly a shock. She'd been threatening to end the long-running No. 1 talk show for years, ever since she'd first mentioned plans to retire way back in 1997. Winfrey changed her mind and renewed her contract through 2002. When that year finally rolled around, she revealed another change of plans: She would pull the plug in 2006 (the show's 20th anniversary year). But in 2009, after she extended her contract again, she announced that the show would cease broadcast for good in 2011.

Monday, September 13, 2010, marked the first episode of the show's final season, and the charismatic host started it off with a bang. She told the exuberant audience members that she was taking all 300 of them on an exotic vacation to Australia. Oh, and her good buddy John Travolta -- actor, pilot, and Scientologist extraordinaire -- would be the guy to fly them there. The psyched audience careened over the edge into delirium (which tends to happen whenever Oprah gives things away).

One more secret to reveal
Midway through the season, Winfrey, who had dissected her personal life so deeply that she seemed to have no secrets left, told another one: She had a half-sister named Patricia. "I wanted you to hear it from me first," Winfrey told her audience, and outlined how Patricia, who was born in 1963, began to search in 2007 for her birth mother (who did not respond to her outreach). A televised interview with Vernita Winfrey -- Oprah's mother -- revealed details of her two deceased children, whose names matched Patricia's dead siblings. Though her family eventually found out, Oprah was kept in the dark until her assistant told her. The amazing story was made even more emotional by the fact that her half-sister hadn't attempted to capitalize on the relationship.

A humble last hurrah
On May 25, 2011, the final (4,561st) episode of "The Oprah Winfrey Show" aired. It was quieter and more personal than usual. Standing for the last time on her Harpo stage, Winfrey received a standing ovation -- but this time the devoted audience was made up of only her friends and family, including her longtime love, Stedman Graham, and her fourth-grade teacher. Speaking directly to the camera, Winfrey expressed gratitude for her success and her fans, telling them between tears that "you and this show have been the greatest love of my life."

A network of her OWN
Ceasing production didn't mean closing up shop. Winfrey launched a massive new media venture: the Oprah Winfrey Network, a women-targeted cable TV network all her, ahem, OWN. Since her eponymous talk show's final episode, Winfrey fans have gotten their fix through her show, "Oprah's Lifeclass." But the upstart network has been struggling since it launched in January; Forbes reported that "its average prime-time audience dropped 37 percent to 250,000 viewers in July."

Things may be turning around, though, as the network might have a hit on its hands with its Rosie O'Donnell talk vehicle, "The Rosie Show," recently given high marks by critics. So will Oprah's second act succeed? The jury's still out, but somehow we don't doubt it.

Laura Barcella is a freelance writer and a Yahoo! copy editor. She has written pop culture, news, arts, and lifestyle pieces for more than 40 publications, including Salon.com, the Village Voice, AlterNet, ElleGirl, Nylon, Time Out New York, CNN.com, Bust, and the Chicago Sun-Times. She's also the editor of the forthcoming anthology Madonna and Me, a collection of Madge-centric personal essays by women writers.

September 18 marked the last chapter in the story of Borders. The chain started out in 1971 as a used bookstore in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and expanded to more than 1,000 stores from coast to coast. But like all stories, Borders would come to an end.

As the digital age of media, e-readers, and online stores rushed to the forefront of the book-selling business, Borders struggled to keep up with its competitors. The company, founded by siblings Tom and Louis Borders, was known for its cozy, relaxing, and community-oriented atmosphere. As Wired magazine put it, "Borders ... pioneered the idea that a bookstore could be more like a combination of a library and your living room."

In 2005, Borders added Seattle's Best Coffee cafes -- another company founded by brothers -- to its U.S. locations, making it even more of a community destination. "A family could spend part of a rainy weekend afternoon in Borders, and each of its members could find something to enjoy," recalls Ron Hart, a Yahoo! contributor who lives in New York. "Sometimes it seemed half the neighborhood was there reading books and sharing coffee."

Neighborhood community center
For people in storm-prone areas, the local Borders became the go-to place to access the Internet and connect with family and neighbors after a power outage. "Neighbors convened in the Borders cafe with their laptops, connecting to the outside world," writes Yahoo! Contributor Carol Bengle Gilbert of Silver Spring, Maryland. "It was as much community center as electrical lifeline; we could count on running into people we knew throughout the day."

But the environment its customers valued so much proved to be unprofitable in an increasingly technological industry, where customers could buy a digital version of the same book they were reading at Borders at a discounted price. Or people could buy the book online and skip going to the store altogether.

After decades of strong growth, Borders faltered. It partnered with Amazon in 2001 to run its online business but didn't create its own e-commerce site until 2008. And it spent the past few years trying to catch up to its competitors' e-readers: Borders launched the Kobo in 2010, two years after Amazon and Barnes & Noble released the Kindle and the Nook.

In February 2011, after years of declining profits and lagging innovation, Borders filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and opened itself up to bidders. None came. Five months later, the chain announced that it would be closing the 399 remaining stores and putting 11,000 employees out of work. By the end of September, Borders bookstores ceased to exist.

The future of bookstores
On a larger scale, Borders' shutdown marked a fading era of family trips to the neighborhood bookstore, where the kids could sprawl in the children's section, while the adults drank coffee, read magazines, and chatted with the neighbors. Megachains had edged out independent bookstores (more than 1,000 closed in the past decade), and the digital revolution in turn eroded their presence.

Some see a silver lining to Borders' demise, that it gives independent bookstores a chance to return to fill the void. Borders had 1,249 stores at its peak in 2003. A few have moved into the former Borders locations, while others are benefiting from Borders patrons who prefer tangible books.

But some believe that even if independent bookstores are successful in filling Borders' shoes, it won't be the same. "Gone are the days of camping out on a cushy leather armchair to check out the new books," said Yahoo! Contributor Judy Baker, who attended the opening of the Borders in Riverdale, New Jersey, and who would drive an hour to spend time there at least once a week. "Gone is the luxury of reading the latest magazines while enjoying a Seattle's Best latte in the cafe."

The new generation of independent bookstores are hybrids of the old and new eras. They stock the physical books along with the option to buy the e-versions online. Even that model must change fast: The number of American e-reader owners doubled from 6% to 12% in the first six months of this year. According to Information Today, e-books will make up 16% of all books worldwide by 2014. By 2017, there will be about 54 million e-readers in the world. One publishing consultant predicts that over the next decade, shelf space devoted to print books in physical stores will decline 90% as e-readers proliferate.

With technological improvements, the definition and use of bookstores continue to evolve. As Carol Fitzgerald, founder of BookReporter.com, a network of websites for book discussions, says, "Maybe we'll come to think of them as reading stores, or readers' stores, or publishing stores, or idea stores, more than simply bookstores."

—Torrey AndersonSchoepe is a news and social media editor for Yahoo! News. She also follows business, economic, and financial news and has written a variety of stories for Yahoo! News, including an in-depth profile on the last man out of the South Tower of the World Trade Center for the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Follow her on Twitter @torrey_ynews and subscribe to her on Facebook.

Photo by paulswansen/Flickr

After 10 years, the Harry Potter series came to its cinematic end this July.  The No. 1 film searched for on Yahoo! in 2011, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part II," earned enough money to fill a new vault or two at Gringott's.  Overall, the film raked in $381 million at the box office, about $80 million more than Part I. Add in $32 million for a midnight opening and the highest single-day sales of $91.1 million on opening day (even adjusted for inflation), and Harry Potter now holds the title of biggest selling film franchise of all time. 

The final chapter was more than just another box office success. "Deathly Hallows" brought a bittersweet and emotional conclusion to a mythic journey that shaped a generation's childhood. For the main actors -- Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint -- the series was quite literally a life-altering experience.  Beginning the films at the age of 11, they grew up together like a family.  For the entire cast, it was difficult to see it all come to an end.  Ten years is a long time to film together, and the final days of shooting became emotional as each actor was celebrated on their final day on the set.

Taking the world by storm
Beginning in the late '90s, the series of award-winning novels by J.K. Rowling took the world by storm, re-invigorating children's love for reading worldwide. When the films were released, the fan base grew hugely, selling record numbers of books internationally. "Deathly Hallows" sold more than 9 million copies in the first 24 hours alone. The week of its release spawned a frenzy of related book buying that gave Rowling 6 of the top 20 spots in USA Today's bestseller list. While the stories are loved universally, they certainly have a special place in the hearts of many 20-somethings who grew up with them.  But people of all ages donned costumes and lined up well before midnight for the magical movie openings, where you could spot everything from tiny house elves to wizened old wizards. 

Die-hard fans do not just stop at movies and books, of course. Harry Potter has spawned theme park attractions, toys, video games, conventions, and loads of fan fiction, enabling endless reading in fan-generated alternate Potterspheres.  Wealthier fans were privileged to buy limited edition and autographed copies, with one hand-written copy of the illustrated wizarding book "The Tales of Beedle the Bard" going for nearly $4 million on the charity auction block.

Over the last decade, the Harry Potter films have made Daniel Radcliff the wealthiest actor under 30 in Britain, with Emma Watson (Hermione Granger) and Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley) not far behind.  As they keep busy with school and other projects, it will be interesting to see how their careers unfold.  In late November, the film conjured up two awards at the Kid's BAFTAs, winning the best film and the audience favorite award, and Hollywood is currently buzzing about a possible Oscar nod.

No eighth novel
As far as what the future holds, J.K. Rowling has dispelled any rumors about an eighth novel. At least that means fans will see no more of their favorite characters killed off. The author has stated that she is currently working on several new projects at once, just as she was when she began writing Harry Potter. As the projects are competing with one another, she is not sure which will make it into print first, but she assures the public that she is "writing hard."

From now on, if you find yourself needing a Harry Potter fix, you'll have to use your imagination and visit Pottermore online, dig into fan fiction, or make your way to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios Orlando.

So long for now, Harry Potter, and thanks for the magic!

Becky Uline is an editor and musician living in San Francisco, where she enjoys digging into Yahoo! data as a sidekick to trend-finding sleuth Vera H-C Chan. Most of her writing is of the musical variety for her band, the Northerlies.

Before MySpace hit the scene, and back when everybody was still talking about Napster, there was Friendster. One of the first social networking sites, Friendster exited that realm in May 2011 to become a social entertainment site, intended to complement Facebook -- the very social network that was blamed for its downfall.

Friendster, which was started in 2002 by Jonathan Abrams, gave its users about a month to export their profiles before they were erased, so the company could focus more on connecting people through gaming, not networking. The site sputtered in the U.S. but picked up a strong following in Asia, and stated its intent to expand there after being acquired in 2009 by a Malaysian company. The newest incarnation essentially creates a parallel social network for your avatar.

Some are comparing the Friendster reinvention to that of MySpace after Facebook trounced it. The two companies' fates are unclear: News Corp., busy managing its own problems in 2011, finally shed MySpace, having bought the company for $580 million back in 2006. Online advertising firm Specific Media acquired the company in June for $35 million -- a little more than a $1 per user. Had the sale happened in 2008 at the same rate per user, the price tag might have been $75 million.

But what's the update on the Friendster so many of us have forgotten? The latest status, from its new CEO: The company is attracting young Asians to social gaming; more than 90% of its new users are based in Asia. The epitaph of the original Friendster, however, is one of wasted potential. It had millions of users only months after its March 2003 launch. How, then, did Facebook end up with all the cool kids? A Harvard Business School professor told the New York Times in 2006 that it was a complicated question but one thing is pretty certain: Abrams, who blames missed audience targeting and terrible technology, probably should have accepted a $30 million buyout offer from Google in 2003.

Considering the launch of Google+ this year, would there have been a whole different Silicon Valley landscape if that 2003 buyout had happened? Instead of creating a social networking site to rival Facebook, might Google have prevented the now powerhouse company from even existing? Of course, Google did launch its own social networking site, Orkut, in 2004. Kind of like Friendster, Orkut really found its following outside the U.S. and is now based in Brazil -- although its members have been bailing fast for Facebook.

The Friendster makeover probably didn't take many by surprise; the change more often prompted some to ask, "Is Friendster still around?" It is, but not as we once knew it. Friendster is now dot-com vintage, a nostalgic relic we can muse about in Facebook status updates or tweets.

A former reporter for the Associated Press and ABC News, Laura E. Davis writes about gay rights and the Supreme Court. She is one of the social media editors for Yahoo! News. Follow her on Twitter at @laura_ynews.

Before Steve Jobs stepped down as CEO of Apple on August 24, he had seen unprecedented sales for the "magical and revolutionary" iPad 2. Two days after he resigned, Apple became, briefly, the world's most valuable company. The iPhone 4S, announced on October 4, the day before Jobs died, broke the company's record for single-day pre-orders.

In a year filled with CEO exits, Jobs's legacy stands out. He has been compared to other iconic leaders who have become household names: Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Walt Disney. He set the bar high for how to run a company successfully -- and get recognition for it. When Jobs stepped down as CEO, he had a 97% approval rate among Apple employees. The number is impressive when compared to those of current leaders like Microsoft's Steve Ballmer (40%) or outgoing ones like MTV's Judy McGrath (a respectable 76%) or HP's Leo Apotheker (25%).

What made Jobs so successful? Many say it was his strong combination of charisma, persistent attention to detail, and never being satisfied with "good enough." Underlying those was his obsession with design, a sense of ethereal modernism, Buddhist simplicity, and a distaste for buttons. Jobs understood customers and what they wanted before they knew it themselves.

Dedicated following
These qualities led to sleek gadgets that created a dedicated following. People camped out overnight to get their hands on Apple's latest products. Jobs continually pushed the envelope to keep his company ahead of the rest. "If anybody's going to make our products obsolete," he once said, "I want it to be us."

But for Jobs, the objective wasn't just creating elegant new gadgets; it was creating simplified ways for people to communicate, interact, and share things with one another.

"The iMac begat a digital hub strategy with iTunes, which begat the iPod," noted Steven Levy, in a profile on Jobs. "The music player eventually served as a launchpad for the iPhone, which in turn evolved into the first massively successful tablet, the iPad. And the iPad's innovations are now inspiring Apple's computers."

Jobs's charisma
But it was his charisma that gave Jobs cultural resonance. He connected with consumers on a personal level and showed them the world as he saw it. "Tech visionaries and engineers generally don't make great orators, let alone presenters," wrote Melissa J. Perenson. "Steve Jobs shattered that mold, with a dynamic presence and charisma that could resonate in an intimate auditorium, or enthrall thousands in the multisection hall at the Worldwide Developers Conference."

When Jobs died, Apple Stores around the world became memorials, as millions of customers posted sticky notes with their messages of remembrance on store windows. Tribute videos poured into YouTube; Twitter could barely handle the number of tweets. Many thanked Jobs for his innovations, saying these had changed their lives. Others shared memories of their first Apple product. Searches on Yahoo! probed into his personal life, as people tried to get a sense of his legacy by watching his 2005 Stanford University commencement speech, researching his background, and asking about the family he left behind.

Although Jobs was known for keeping his personal life private, he had authorized a biography. "I wanted my kids to know me," Jobs said in an interview with his biographer, Walter Isaacson. "I wasn't always there for them, and I wanted them to know why and to understand what I did."

The book, which became a bestseller nine months before it was released, came out the same month as his death.

His final words, which his sister shared with the world, captured the wonder of how he lived and what he shared: "Oh wow. Oh wow. Oh wow."

Torrey AndersonSchoepe is a news and social media editor for Yahoo! News. She also follows business, economic, and financial news and has written a variety of stories for Yahoo! News, including an in-depth profile on the last man out of the South Tower of the World Trade Center for the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Follow her on Twitter @torrey_ynews and subscribe to her on Facebook.

A death of a whistleblower. A scandal in Scotland Yard. A tabloid's collapse. A shaving-cream pie aimed at a media tycoon's mug.

Any one of these would have been the makings of a potboiler, but together they were the story that had been heating up for years and finally exploded in the News of the World scandal. The final spark: The paper's reporters had illegally hacked into voicemails in order to obtain juicy scoops. On July 4, the Guardian revealed that royals and celebrities weren't the only targets; reporters had also hacked into the voicemail of Milly Dowler, a teenager who had been kidnapped and murdered. Six days later, News of the World printed its final edition, ending a 168-year history.

Despite the actions of owner and media tycoon Rupert Murdoch and his deputies, the end of the paper was not the end of the story. Nearly six months later, the scandal has spawned an inquiry that might change reporting in Britain.

Just the beginning
For many Americans who hadn't heard of the paper's rampant misdeeds, the shutdown was just the beginning. This scandal had roots, and snapping off one branch didn't do much to quiet critics. Especially for spectators sitting Stateside, the sudden cascade of resignations on both sides of the pond signaled a juicy story indeed. Within days, resignation letters and arrest warrants came in quick succession from Murdoch's umbrella company, News Corp., and, shockingly, Scotland Yard.

More than a dozen reporters, detectives, and executives were arrested, including the favored Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson. Coulson had been hired by British prime minister David Cameron after Coulson resigned as editor of News of the World because of -- you guessed it -- hacking allegations back in 2007. Three days after the final News of the World issue, Murdoch dropped his bid for the television company British Sky Broadcasting.

In the middle of all this, Sean Hoare, a former News of the World reporter who exposed the tabloid's shady dealings, was found dead at his London home. Police called his death nonsuspicious, but it nonetheless added to the unfolding drama. An inquest later found that he died of natural causes.

"Most humble day of my life"
On July 19, Murdoch, son James, and Brooks, out on bail, appeared before Parliament, a rare occurrence. The elder Murdoch called it "the most humble day of my life" -- and that was before comedian-activist Jonnie Marbles aimed a shaving-cream pie at his face. But the 80-year-old was in good hands: His wife, Wendi Deng Murdoch, leaped into action and tossed the pie right back at the assailant.

The trouble for Murdoch continued through the summer, and it's not over yet: The scandal is still being investigated in the Leveson Inquiry. The muck has seeped through the highest levels of government and through Scotland Yard, with allegations that police were in cahoots with News of the World, either for money or because they were afraid that reporters might publish details about their lives.

In September, when he learned he'd be called back to face Parliament, James Murdoch quit two U.K. newspaper boards, leaving no Murdoch family member on the boards of News Corp.'s papers there. That same month, in an interview with the Guardian, the very paper that had blown the story wide open, Wendi Deng Murdoch said of the scandal that "a few people made a mistake." That concept is reflected in Rupert's and James's statements that they didn't know as much as one might think.

The official verdict likely won't come until September 2012, but it seems the practices were widespread -- and not just at News of the World or even only within News Corp. And the paper's demise has also brought a limit to Murdoch's empire.

A former reporter for the Associated Press and ABC News, Laura E. Davis writes about gay rights and the Supreme Court. She is one of the social media editors for Yahoo! News. Follow her on Twitter at @laura_ynews.

Kate Gosselin didn't start out associated with spray tans, "Dancing With the Stars," and rumored affairs with Australian bodyguards. But that's how she ended. The world would likely never have known a thing about the 36-year-old suburban Pennsylvania mom had she not given birth to twins and sextuplets and then agreed in 2007 -- along with then-husband Jon -- to have their lives filmed. The original series of cutesy specials eventually turned into the hugely successful "Jon & Kate Plus 8."

Looking back, the whole facade of "average middle class family trying to get by with eight kids and squeeze in a date night once in a while" started cracking early on. Kate got a tummy tuck; Jon got hair plugs; they both stopped working (because starring in your own reality show, it turns out, pays well).  The show became less about the Gosselins' hectic day-to-day lives and more about famous people trying to get good ratings. There were all-expenses-paid trips to Disney World and ski resorts, talk show appearances, in-home cooking lessons with celebrity chefs, and a gated mansion on 24 acres. Viewers watched Jon and Kate's reality slip away.

And then, of course, came the divorce that played out in the tabloids and on TV, with Jon gallivanting around with new girlfriends and Kate making nasty accusations through the media. What happened to those chaotic dinners at the kitchen table and the action-packed trips to the grocery store? The frazzled family that used to look like yours (only bigger) was no more, and the show that began by innocently following a gaggle of diaper-clad toddlers had turned the Gosselin home into a broken one. And therein lies the problem, viewers realized. Reality TV, it seems, changes reality.

Kate hung on tightly to her 15 minutes of fame with the sorry-sounding "Kate Plus 8" after Jon ditched the show, but her solo effort didn't last long. TLC pulled the plug on the single-mom series after a little more than a year. By the end, the show seemed like a never-ending publicity stunt, complete with a Sarah Palin camping trip episode. Thus ended an era of "reality" that might never have existed in the first place. These days, Kate's trying to reinvent herself as a coupon blogger, and Jon mostly stays out of the spotlight, except when he resurfaces to publicly comment on his ex. Both claim to be focused on the kids, who, sadly, will most likely not emerge from their childhoods unscathed.

Will there be more reality shows about big families, odd families, and average families coming our way? Probably. But viewers will likely not trust those families as they did Jon and Kate. We'll know that next batch of down-to-earth, everyday folks who just happen to have cameras following them around aren't going to stay that way for long. And what's the point of watching if we already know how it's going to end?

Lizbeth Scordo is a content editor for Yahoo! Entertainment, where she focuses on celebrity headlines for omg! and TV news for Yahoo! TV. She has contributed to Us Weekly, TV Guide, Los Angeles Business Journal, Every Day With Rachael Ray, and Angeleno. She currently resides in Los Angeles but will forever be a proud Jersey girl who grew up spending summers on the Jersey Shore long before MTV ever set foot there. Follow her on Twitter.

Before 2011, few people had heard of Elizabeth Warren. Those who had included Time magazine, which named her one of the new "sheriffs" in town to clean up Washington and Wall Street, and Yahoo! Year in Review 2010, which saw her buzz rise in a burgeoning financial uprising.

That name, though, became a hot political topic when President Obama passed her over to lead the new government agency she fought to create, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The move appeared to be more than snuffing out a high-profile consumer voice. Along with the departure of Sheila Bair at the FDIC, it was an end of two potentially interesting experiments: bringing back policy wonks in a bickering political atmosphere and having a female presence among the top economic advisers.

Warren, a law school professor born and raised in Oklahoma, decided in 1979 to study bankruptcy. Just the year before, Congress passed a law making it easier to file for bankruptcy, and she wanted to find out the root causes for filing.

The former Sunday school teacher expected cheaters, people trying to game the system. Instead, she concluded that many filings resulted from people losing their jobs, illness at home, and confusing and complicated financial documents with "tricks and traps" in the fine print. That was when she developed strong feelings about consumer advocacy. By 2009, she was known as an expert in debt and the middle class -- a subject that would become a political firestorm in 2011.

An invitation to politics
Warren crossed over into politics when she advised the new National Bankruptcy Review Commission. She battled against legislation that would have made it harder for people to declare bankruptcy. She considered the version of the bill that passed in 2005 a defeat, which fueled her fire even further.

In 2008, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asked her to head the congressional panel overseeing the bailouts issued as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program. She set herself apart in that role, especially in one televised hearing where she demanded answers from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on where exactly AIG's bailout money went (see a clip on YouTube).

Throughout that time she was working on creating the CFPB, which was eventually formed with the sweeping Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, enacted in July 2010. Obama asked the janitor's daughter to be interim leader. When it came time to appoint the head of the new agency, Warren was not chosen.

Obama picked Richard Cordray instead. Opponents of the agency had made clear their strong stance against the regulation bureau and the woman who created it. Senate GOP members said the new agency had "unfettered authority" over businesses and banks, which would stifle the free market, while advocates said that simplified and clearer processes would benefit average Americans.

Bipartisan irritation
Cordray's appointment angered some who created petitions and got hundreds of thousands of signatures urging Obama to have Warren head the CFPB. Obama was only too aware of Republican opposition, hinting that the battle would have been too intense. "She's become perhaps the leading voice in our country on behalf of consumers," he said. "She's done it while facing some very tough opposition."

One high-ranking Obama official gave a deeper look at how politics work in Washington. "I really like Elizabeth and think she would have been a great choice, but there was always something outsider about her that scared people here," the anonymous staffer told the Daily Beast. "They couldn't trust her because she wasn't one of them."

Warren is now taking her fight to a new arena: She is campaigning against Massachusetts Republican incumbent Scott Brown in 2012 for a Senate seat. Some see her as a top contender who could unseat Brown; others, as a November viral video showed, have condemned her for being a socialist. In either case, the act of running is an interesting strategy: If the Senate doesn't approve you, then join it.

Torrey AndersonSchoepe is a news and social media editor for Yahoo! News. She also follows business, economic, and financial news and has written a variety of stories for Yahoo! News, including an in-depth profile on the last man out of the South Tower of the World Trade Center for the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Follow her on Twitter @torrey_ynews and subscribe to her on Facebook.

The United States has more than 100 Status of Forces Agreements or, in an unlikely acronym, SOFAs. A congressional report states that SOFAs "generally establish the framework under which U.S. military personnel operate in a foreign country, addressing how the domestic laws of the foreign jurisdiction shall be applied toward U.S. personnel while in that country."

That was one of several agreements signed in November 2008 by U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, one year after the respective leaders of each country signed a Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship Between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America. The SOFA stipulated a two-part withdrawal: the departure of combat forces no later than June 30, 2009, and then the withdrawal of all U.S. forces no later than December 31, 2011.

But nothing is straightforward in a conflict that has involved American troops since March 2003. President Obama followed the timeline, and his campaign pledge, largely according to schedule. He confirmed the Iraqi drawdown. The announcement drew ire from Republicans, from presidential hopefuls to Senator John McCain. A military historian declared the move a "tragedy" and accused the Obama administration of offering a "puny force" of 5,000 troops, instead of committing to a more "robust" presence to aid Iraq's democratic efforts and thwart neighbors such as Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Ready to withdraw
The objections weren't shared by the public. In a year when high approval was hard to come by, three out of four Americans supported the withdrawal. The Gallup poll numbers in favor of withdrawal were overwhelming from Democrats (96%) and strong from independents (77%), while a majority of Republicans (52%) disapproved.

By March 2008, before that SOFA was signed, some Americans had already stopped keeping track of troop sacrifices. Awareness was discouragingly low throughout the conflict: In summer 2007, 54% of Americans knew how many soldiers had died. Seven months later, 35% knew that nearly 4,000 had been confirmed dead. Not surprisingly, awareness corresponded with war news coverage.

Unprepared for the homecoming?
That brings up a constant concern, which was the subject of a Time cover story: The 45,000 troops due home (mostly in North Carolina and Texas) will return to a country occupied -- sometimes literally -- by other concerns. A common narrative, such as the one investigated by PBS, is how America is unprepared for its vets, either with jobs or with PTSD treatment. (The Senate did pass a jobs bill featuring employer tax incentives to hire unemployed vets.)

Time magazine, however, highlights a different divide: "Soldiers and sailors are more highly paid, more likely to be married, and more conservative politically than the nation as a whole." They tend to be healthier and have access to schools and medical care right on base. They also feel they hold stronger values than the average citizen -- a disquieting sense of elitism that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has addressed before cadets on at least two occasions.

Of course, not everyone will stay home. Some will join the 40,000 troops already stationed in the Persian Gulf, namely in Kuwait and international waters.

Watching Iraq's neighbors
As for Iraq's future, a few developments guard against Iran swooping into the vacuum. There is Iran's own infighting and the alleged bizarre plot involving plans to hire Mexican drug lords to kill a Saudi Arabian ambassador on American soil. Iran -- which suppressed its own 2009 civilian revolt -- has tried to capitalize on the Arab Spring, but its rival Turkey, despite its Kurdish problems, has emerged as the elder influential statesman in the region. Turkey, as the Economist points out, "has large commercial interests in Iraq."

And then there's basic customer service: After the fall of Saddam Hussein, Iraqis became annoyed with Iranians' cheap merchandise and profiteering. Said one Iraqi factory owner to the New York Times, "After the fall of the regime, many Iranian companies came here, but they screwed it all up."

The Yahoo! Year in Review editorial lead for five years running, Vera H-C Chan dissects news events, pop-culture idiosyncrasies, and online behavior to probe the "why" behind what's hot online. On Yahoo!, her articles can be found in News, TV, Movies, and her Shine blog Fast-Talking Dame. Across the Net, there are remnants of contributions to a cultural travel guide, martial arts encyclopedia, movie criticism, business profiles, and A&E/features reporting.