Does Obama Have the Backbone?
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
 Barack Obama's trip to Copenhagen to pitch Chicago for the Olympics would have been a dumb move whatever the outcome. But as it turned out (an airy dismissal would not be an unfair description), it poses some questions about his presidency that are way more important than the proper venue for synchronized swimming. The first, and to my mind most important, is whether Obama knows who he is. This business of self-knowledge is no minor issue. It bears greatly on the single most crucial issue facing this young and untested president: Afghanistan. Already, we have his choice for Afghanistan commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, taking the measure of his commander in chief and publicly telling him what to do. This MacArthuresque star turn called for a Trumanesque response, but Obama offered nothing of the kind. Instead, he used McChrystal as a prop, adding a bit of four-star gravitas to that silly trip to Copenhagen by having the general meet with him there. This is the president we now have: He inspires lots of affection but not a lot of awe. It is the latter, though, that matters most in international affairs, where the greatest and most gut-wrenching tests await Obama. If he remains consistent to his rhetoric of just seven weeks ago, he will send more troops to Afghanistan and more of them will die. "This is not a war of choice," he said. "This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al-Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans." Obama could have gone…

  From Golden State to failed stateThe California dream of security and prosperity is dead. To revive it, we must change our government, and the way we live     Comments (82)Robert Cruickshank guardian.co.ukCalifornia has become a failed state. Its political system is unable to resolve a financial crisis that has prevented us from using government to end high unemployment and restore the California dream.California's crisis is by no means unique. Other states face serious budget problems, including Pennsylvania and New York. Yet none of those states possess the iconic presence of California, the state that more than any other symbolised American prosperity in the latter half of the 20th century. California's failure causes deeper angst. If California cannot survive this crisis, then some very basic assumptions about American civilisation must be questioned. Perhaps that civilisation is no longer tenable in its present form.The California dream is a fundamental expression of the human desire for something more than the ability to put food on the table. California has been a place where people can create and innovate, and do so without having to worry about how they will make ends meet, because the state has backed policies that will ensure basic economic security and prosperity.That dream is dead. Policies enacted in the second half of the 20th century ultimately undermined it. Sprawling suburbs and farms, wasting land, oil, water and money, produced a state whose economy and finances were vulnerable to resource shocks. Few worried about those risks at the time, and instead credited the suburban model for enabling California in the 1960s to provide free schools, a generous welfare state and strong infrastructure, all of which allowed people to come here and realise their…

  Petraeus is right to question Obama’s exit strategy Thank goodness we have General David Petraeus running the Nato mission in Afghanistan,  Read Article  

 Travel like a rock star Guitarist tells how bands really tour and shares travel tips that rockers have refined: Where to stay, what to pack, who has the best rock clubs and more.  Mike Herron, one of the founders of the Incredible String Band, takes a notebook and fills it with photos of all the stuff he likes like Indian food and with photos of things he may need, like a pharmacist or doctor. When he needs something, he just points to a picture. It's actually very clever and works in places like Iceland."
Read Article   

 chicagotribune.com While at Yale, Sotomayor made a law firm apologize By James Oliphant and Andrew Zajac Chicago tribune Tribune staff reporter   WASHINGTON
The early White House story line on Sonia Sotomayor emphasizes her pragmatism and a cautious, measured approach to the law developed over a years-long climb from exceedingly modest circumstances to become the first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court.

But an incident in the fall of 1978 illustrates another side of Sotomayor. Then a daring and assertive Yale University law student, she took a stand against a white-shoe Washington law firm that could have jeopardized her career.

While interviewing for jobs during her final year of school, she accused the firm, then known as Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, of discriminating against her by asking questions about the qualifications of Puerto Ricans and other minorities.

Sotomayor's complaint caused a campus furor. A student-faculty panel found the complaint warranted and ordered Shaw Pittman to write her a letter of apology.

The complaint resulted from dinner conversation between Sotomayor and a Shaw Pittman partner, Martin Krall. According to press reports at the time, Krall asked her whether she would have been admitted to law school if she were not Puerto Rican and whether law firms did a disservice by hiring minority students with inferior credentials and then firing them a few years later.

Before attending Yale, Sotomayor graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University and won that school's highest academic honor for an undergraduate. She served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal and was one of just a handful of Hispanics in her class.

Reached by telephone Wednesday at his home in Florida, Krall said only, "I've got nothing…