You Crossed the Line, Sarah! The Shield is Up!

In the jargon of their profession, I suppose news anchors have a name for the last question in an interview. I do not know what they call it, but it appears to be a kind of “free” question off-topic from the boilerplate nature of the body of the interview. If you watched Secretary Clinton on the Sunday talk show circuit this past weekend, you saw her answering pretty much the same questions on the same subjects on all three shows, but at the end, each interviewer threw in a “free” question. Schieffer asked her about airport pat downs (a coup for him, I thought – the cable and network news are still looping that clip). Wallace, lamely I thought, asked her about running for president, and Gregory asked her about Sarah Palin. Here is how it went.

QUESTION: Secretary Clinton, before I let you go, I have to ask you this just as a political observer. What do you make of what happened on election day? And all this talk about Sarah Palin – when I interviewed you a while back, you said you’d be willing to sit down and have coffee with her. She may be someone who is in a position to try to equal what you accomplished in the political arena. What advice might you give her and what do you make of what’s happened politically?

SECRETARY CLINTON: You know, David, the best thing about being of Secretary of State is representing the United States around the world, but the second best thing is I’m out of politics. So with all due respect, I am not going to comment on the political scene right now other than to say that I’m focused on making the case to 67-plus senators in the Senate to pass the START treaty because that, to me, is the most important task facing the Senate and it goes way beyond politics.

QUESTION: And here I thought I’d lulled you into a moment of candor. (Laughter.) Secretary Clinton, thank you very much, as always.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, David.

Given an opportunity to remark about Palin, Hillary Clinton gracefully danced around the question, and put her agenda out in front instead, refocusing the moment, and the end of an interview is a powerful moment, on New START, a formidable product of her tenure at State.

I have seen Hillary do this before.   Remember back in 2008?  She was asked about a “lipstick” comment that had been made about Palin and responded, “I like lipstick.  I use it, but let’s fix our financial institutions.”  (Something like that – probably not her exact words.)

So I was befuddled as to why someone whom Hillary Clinton has taken pains NOT to attack has chosen to launch an unprovoked attack  on her.  With the release of Palin’s book today came some excerpts, and this one, for me, is the final straw.

[Palin] says she admires Hillary Clinton, but that her “baking cookies” remarks sounded like “someone frozen in an attitude of 1960s-era, bra-burning militancy.”

You can see more about this section at this Huffpo page>>>>

It is more than harsh. It is an unwarranted, gratuitous, unilateral attack.   Unlike many of us in her generation, Hillary Clinton did not choose the militant route.  While we were shouting at demonstrations, she was studying law.  She was a singularly focused young individual who saw some things that needed to be changed and pursued a route that would equip her to address them.  She was and still is a very disciplined person who found her time better spent in the library than carrying a poster.

I am not disparaging what the rest of us did.  Ultimately, we did, I believe, make America aware of the reasons why we needed to withdraw fron Viet Nam and of the inequities in the culture.  We were noisy while Hillary was quietly studying in the library.

So to brand her with a descriptor like “bra-burning militancy”  is not only inaccurate,  but completely uncalled for since Hillary has not said anything unkind or untoward about Palin.

She has called Hillary a whiner when she herself has whined about her treatment.  Now she brands her unfairly as something she never was.

More than so many of my generation, Hillary Clinton has always been goal-oriented and on-task.  For someone who was not even there to witness the era to brand her this way over a remark she made to explain her personal choice is unacceptable and mean.

This is it, Sarah.  You have crossed the line with me.  I will never defend you again.  The next time I go to B.J.’s I will be turning your pile of books face down and putting a few copies of James Patterson on top so no one will know your book is there.

I dare anyone to tell me I am unfair in calling Sarah Palin on this base and baseless shot at my Homegirl.  She had no reason to talk about Hillary at all.  Hillary does not talk about her.

Read Full Post »

Oh! Language! part 3

Wednesday is the heaviest day of the year for air travel in the U.S.   With TSA pat downs dominating the news cycle for days now,  travelers have been alerted to possible screening slowdowns as passengers are encouraged to opt out of the body scanners in favor of more time-consuming pat downs.  This is the  last thing Thanksgiving travelers want to encounter, the worst nightmare at the start of, for many, a four-day weekend:  The dreaded Delay.

Americans despise delays.  We devote hours of early morning air time and untold gallons of copter fuel to inform our morning commutes in order to conserve,  as best we can, our personal fuel purchased at prices we perceive as exorbitant no matter what that price might be. as well as to conserve our precious time.  “Time is money,” we say, and it is true!  Late arrival at work might get your pay or vacation time docked.   Too many late arrivals can get you fired.  Not good news in a bad economy.

Of course  it is unlikely that your family will dock or fire you for a late arrival at Thanksgiving, unless you make them wait to cut the turkey.  But Americans are among the hardest and longest working people on earth. So when we hit the roads and air routes on “getaway day,” we do so with the same obsession to “make good time” as we do when commuting to work. Clearly the “opt out” movement is going to be disconcerting to many travelers this holiday by delaying the screening process and, as a result, possibly departure times.

No we do not like to lose or waste time.   Who does?  This predilection is reflected in our language. When was the last time a native speaker of American English told you s/he had influenza, rode the omnibus to work, had to have laboratory work done, proclaimed him/herself to be a Giants fanatic? (I could go on. You get my point.) We clip these words because we do not have time to say all those syllables. Time is money!  We clip our words, and the clippings rise in currency, sometimes to the extent that we cannot immediately remember the original form,  if we ever knew it – an experience I had last night when I really had the think about  where “diss” comes from.

I was explaining the behavior of a character in HBO’s “Boardwalk Empire” at the time. The episode was compelling because we saw women get the vote last night, (YAY!) and we began to see Irish immigrant and widow Margaret Schroeder commence what may become a political career. (Parenthetically: I hope HBO allows her character to develop along these lines rather than cut her off at the knees the way Showtime did Princess Mary in “The Tudors, who began showing signs of a hard, cruel edge in the final two episodes ever. I would have liked to have seen how she became who she was.) But I digress.

In another scene, “Nukie” Thompson’s manservant/bodyguard, as one of Nukie’s rivals enters the room, asks if he should frisk the visitor. What? Oh! WAIT!   We HAVE a perfectly good, one-syllable word that we American time-freaks are eschewing in favor of a longer two-syllable compound?   It is downright Un-American!  “Pat down” in favor of the more efficient “frisk?” WTF?  It is so short, I actually had to check the etymology.  It has that Anglo-Saxon ring to it.

frisk

1510s, “to dance, frolic,” from M.Fr. frisque “lively, brisk,” possibly from a Germanic source (cf. M.Du. vrisch “fresh”). Sense of “pat down in a search” first recorded 1781. Related: Frisked; frisking.

(Aha!  “pat down” is in there!  And it is fresh!)

Obviously it has to do with framing, a component of metaphor development brilliantly analyzed by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in Metaphors We Live By (University of Chicago Press, 1980) a skill long ago mastered by Republicans and traditionally elusive to Democrats until now perhaps.  The impact of “pat down” is related to other collocations of the word “pat.”  A pat on the back, a love pat, a pat on the cheek or head, whether metaphorical or physical, are all perceived with positive connotations.  So how can a pat down be negative?

“Frisking,” on the other hand, is done by mobsters like Nukie Thompson’s henchmen or the police upon  executing an arrest.  Goodness gracious, we would never be frisking tiny children, grandmothers, nuns, and sundry other solid citizens unlikely to be threatening their fellow humans, of course not!  No, we simply “pat them down.”  It sounds so gentle and affectionate, contrary to the description by some who have experienced it.

Thus we are lulled into a sense of the pat down being a loving gesture performed for the sake of everyone’s well-being.  Nice metaphor!  Not everyone is mollified, however, by our current, culturally discordant propensity for the longer, more awkward term rather than the less time consuming “frisk.”   This little video clip from yesterday is apparently on an endless loop at some news channels.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

No, our lovely, and for so many reasons, eminently “pattable”  Head Homegirl would not like to be patted down if she could avoid it.  Hmmmmmmm.  The Democrats finally succeed in framing something, and the most prominent female Democrat (non-political though she may have to be as SOS) slices right through the comfort zone.  “Who would?”  Indeed! She does not want anybody getting fresh with her! No, neither do we.

Read Full Post »

U.N. Launches New Website: Every Woman Every Child

I like to think that it is Hillary Clinton’s high international profile and close work with the U.N. and Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon that has heralded the body’s recent strong focus on living conditions of women and children.   Whether that is the case or not, women and children are in the spotlight.  A tweet from the U.N. this morning introduced me to this newly launched website.

Here is Mme. Secretary’s inaugural comment on their homepage.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, US Secretary of State “The Obama Administration has put women and children at the heart of our development efforts, including our Global Health Initiative. This is a day that we have long waited for. I thank the Secretary-General for his leadership and congratulations on this remarkable effort.”

Check it out!

Every Woman Every Child

Read Full Post »

Hillary Clinton: Her Reputation Precedes Her

Early in her tenure as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made it clear that an important component in foreign policy as she intended to fashion it would be issues and challenges facing women and girls the world over.  In her 21+ months as SOS she has deepened, broadened, and elevated that commitment to a cause, a signature issue the likes of which has not been seen on the global stage and so unusual that for a very long time some thought incorrectly that she had no signature issue at all.

Well it is eminently clear now.  So powerful is her message that  this article by AFP’s Madeleine Coorey implies that it may be the primary item on Hillary’s agenda when she visits Papua-New Guinea later this week.

It comes as no surprise to the Homegirls and Homeboys here, but it is gratifying to see Hillary’s Secretarial Crest rise from the waters of Oceania as a target issue.

Here she is this week with residents of the Siem Reap Rehabilitation Shelter for victims of human trafficking.  These young women understand her dedication.

 

Here is the article by Coorey.

Clinton visit raises hopes for embattled Pacific women

By Madeleine Coorey (AFP)

SYDNEY — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit this week to impoverished Papua New Guinea has raised hopes of a greater focus on tackling shocking levels of violence against women in the Pacific nation.

In a flying visit to Port Moresby on Wednesday, Clinton will “stress the importance of empowering women” in a country rights group Amnesty says suffers from extremely high rates of abuse and discrimination towards females.

“If you are born a woman in PNG you are already at a disadvantage,” University of Papua New Guinea law lecturer Tapora Isorua told AFP.

“The fact that someone of Hillary Clinton’s status is coming to PNG and addressing that issue could… bring the message across to parliamentarians.”

Read more>>>>

Read Full Post »

Jen O’Malley Dillon: The DNC Cares About My Vote! (Really? REALLY???)

This showed up in my inbox a little while ago. No she did not use a salutation, a nicety that has gone by the boards since the “new leadership” has taken over this party.  (Of course this was addressed to my real name and I responded with that.)

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Jen O’Malley Dillon, Democrats.org <democraticparty@democrats.org> wrote:

Still4Hill —

For the first 144 years of this country’s existence, women were not guaranteed the right to vote — and winning that right did not come easily.

Women’s suffrage took a movement. It took organizers who worked tirelessly and allies who fought for the cause in the halls of power. On August 18th, 1920, when the legislature of the state of Tennessee voted to ratify the 19th Amendment and affirm its place in the Constitution, it passed by a single vote.

Because of the work of those who came before me, my right to cast a ballot was never in question. From the first time that I stepped into a voting booth to the day when I became the executive director of the Democratic Party, I’ve been deeply mindful of that fact.

Last week, President Obama asked us all to make a commitment to vote this fall. To me, that promise isn’t just about choosing the direction I hope to see this country take — it’s an opportunity to honor those who didn’t have the right to vote but fought so that their daughters and granddaughters would not be denied the full measure of citizenship.

Will you join me and commit to vote in this year’s election?

The movement for suffrage began before the Civil War. Women faced prison sentences — even beatings — to cast ballots as a gesture of protest. Even before the right to vote was won, women like Victoria Woodhull and Belva Lockwood ran for office. States across the country began to grant suffrage, and on the eve of the First World War, Woodrow Wilson — a Democrat — became the first president to take up the call.

Susan B. Anthony devoted her life to the cause of equality, and in 1897, decades before her fight was won, she wrote “Suffrage is the pivotal right.” In the 90 years since the 19th Amendment became law, that statement has borne out.

Today, in the United States, there are more women registered to vote than men, and the gap stands at nearly 10 million. From House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, women hold office at every level of government.

But the fight for full equality is not finished. In 2008, a woman in the United States earned only 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. For women of color, the disparity is even greater.

We have a choice with this election about whether we want to continue the fight to bring down barriers — whether we want to move forward or backward. We’ll decide whether we want to honor the legacy of those who couldn’t vote but reached for that right. But all those decisions begin with the promise that you will participate in the fall elections.

Commit to vote:

http://my.democrats.org/Suffrage

Thanks,

Jen

Jen O’Malley Dillon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee

Here is how I responded.  I did not bother with the nicety of a salutation either.  Neither did I bother to “click to commit.”  Oh, and I disabled the link on this post.  If you want to click to commit, you’ll have to seek out their website.  A little cutting and pasting will do it.  But I do not think the Homegirls and Homeboys here will want to do that. 😀

Jen,

I vote in EVERY election. I voted in my state’s presidential primary on Super Tuesday in 2008. I also saw my governor shred my vote on the convention floor in Denver. It seems to me that the last people in the world who care about my vote are the Democratic Party leadership. Donna Brazile famously told the base in 2008 to stay home!

So NOW you care about my vote? And you DARE to invoke the name of Hillary Rodham Clinton? Wow! The party must be in trouble! If the Democratic Party wants to hang onto the Oval Office, it needs to wise up. The only candidate who can keep this party in power is Hillary Rodham Clinton, the woman whose nomination this party torpedoed in 2008. When this party corrects that error, I will consider myself a Democrat again.

Beg her, and pray that she accepts. I am not talking about any “supporting role.” She has been doing that assiduously since June 2008, and, frankly, I’m done with that. TOP OF THE TICKET FOR HER! Then I will know this party honestly cares about women, suffrage, enfranchisement, honesty, and fairness.

Regards,

Still4Hill

Now you KNEW I would not end this without a pic of the Homegirl-in-Chief!

Read Full Post »

Tina Brown & The Outrageous Green Monster

Judging from the comments I read both at the original post and at the Facebook pages where this article was linked, I think I speak for all the Homegirls and Homeboys when I say, resignedly, that I really did not expect better.   In fact, the Team HIllary Clinton Facebook denizens can attest that exactly a month ago, I warned that something like this would happen.  Am I shocked? No.  Does that make this easier to swallow? Absolutely not.  It is patently outrageous, predictable as it was.

The History

Although she claims to have been a Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter, in the past year we have seen a few articles and comments from Tina Brown that ring odd coming from a self-proclaimed admirer.  In summer of last year, for example she published her much circulated article  Hillary, Take Off Your Burqa , AKA Obama’s Other Wife. in which she suggested that Obama was keeping Hillary in the shadows, eclipsing her, as it were, and that for sundry reasons that amounted to left-handed compliments to our Homegirl, he should let her take off her burqa.   A link to The Daily Beast article by Brown appears in this post:  Mean Season at the All-Star Break.

Almost a month later, in the midst of a taxing two-week tour of Africa, Hillary briefy lashed out at a question during a Townterview.  She understood the question to have been about her husband’s opinion.  Truth be told, many of us Homegirls actually enjoyed the little outburst.  She was awesome.   Tina Brown was later known to comment that Hillary was “…hot, feeling fat, and needed to go to the gym.”  Many of us agree that Hillary is hot, but  not the way Brown meant it.  Commenting about her body, however,  and what she arguably might or might not need to do was way out of line.  Again, we wary Homefolks wondered about Brown’s supposed support of HRC as well as her agenda.

A month ago, Hillary generously and graciously, on a Friday night after a long, typically busy week,  provided introductory remarks at Tina Brown’s Women in the World Summit’s reading of the play Seven.  You can see the text here: Hillary Rodham Clinton: Remarks At the Women In The World Summit. You can also watch the videos here:  Video: Secretary Clinton Introducing the play “Seven” at the Women in the World Summit 03.12.2010.

At the time I posted these,  I alerted the Home boys and girls at Team Hillary Clinton that Tina Brown merited watching.  Hillary did her a big favor despite the snipes Brown had taken at her.  Sure enough,  today a Homegirl and Team member posted a link to an article in The Daily Beast that frivolously asks Are Power Pantsuits the Solution? by Kate Betts

Solution?  Is there a problem?  Doesn’t look like it to me!

Now granted Brown did not write this piece of frivolous, opinionated trash, but The Daily Beast is hers, falls under her oversight, and, as we see it, she should have killed this post.  Furthermore, she should never allow another article of this nature at her blog given the lovely gesture Hillary made for her just last month.

The criticism is lodged at Hillary’s style.  This outfit evidently inspired it,  pantsuit AND shoes.

Now I thought she rocked this look SO beautifully that I posted all the pictures I could find on Sunday here: Photos of Hillary Clinton’s Sunny Sunday in D.C. To find it savaged so thoroughly at a site belonging to someone Hillary had actually graced with her time and presence is an outrage.  It is not a shock.  I fully expected something like this, but  the ungrateful conduct  is contemptible.

To compare Hillary to Michelle Obama is apples and oranges.  To compare her unfavorably to Nancy Pelosi?  Ridiculous!

I REST MY CASE!

I sense envy, the green monster.  Hillary Clinton puts herself together artfully, meticulously, and her natural beauty would allow her to get away with much less, but she goes the extra mile and always looks exquisite.  So, Tina, call your dogs off!  Here’s what we know – when Hillary hears the dogs barking, she keeps going!  And so will we!  Until you cease and desist in your underhanded campaign against an angel in service to her country. Her hard work alone should cause you shame in having allowed this article to be posted.  Her personal favor to you?  You, Madam, are an envious, wretched ingrate!  (You wish you looked that gorgeous!  Not to mention the brain.  You would envy her sense of decency if you had any ethics.)

Some content on this page was disabled on January 28, 2020 as a result of a DMCA takedown notice from Nigel Parry. You can learn more about the DMCA here:

https://wordpress.com/support/copyright-and-the-dmca/

Read Full Post »

Candice “Britt” Britton: A Hillary Clinton Homegirl Runs Against The Machine In District 1 Missouri

It takes grit, guts,  and extraordinary determination to run against an incumbent, especially when he is occupying a dynastic seat, has WAY more money and backing,  feels entitled,  and is, well… a he.   Right away, if you are a she,  impecunious, and lack the media exposure,  you are at a disadvantage.  Well, Candice “Britt” Britton has all of those qualities ( and disadvantages) plus the passion and empathy for people that we all love in our Homegirl Hillary.

I have spotlighted  Homegirl Britt Britton before, but it was just an introduction.  Her story is inspirational,  and now the campaign becomes a battle.  As she explained to me in an email,  there is a popular local TV show called “Donnybrook,”  and the hosts commented that the incumbent (I will not link to his website here – you can google him) Lacy Clay had no real opposition.  Britt has limited access to the internet,  but she composed a letter to the hosts of Donnybrook that I am sharing with all the Homegirls and Homeboys.  Visit Britt’s webpage and see who she is and what she is up against.  She is a Hillary Clinton Democrat and worthy of our support.

Here is her letter to the hosts of “Donnybrook.”

To Ray and Bill and the Donny Brook Hosts,

I watch your show all the time my name is Candice “Britt” Britton and I am running for U. S. Congress District 01.

Judging by your comments on the April 1, 2010 show you all think my candidacy as a Democrat running against Lacy Clay is a lost cause. I am sorry you feel that way. Are you telling children and the disabled and regular citizens you can’t beat a career politician whose family has held the seat for 40 years? Are you telling me (a Democrat) and others there is no need to run? I am sorry you feel Lacy Clay has no real opposition. Are you saying non career politicians (citizens) on the outside of the political machines need not to apply? I take by your comments I don’t have your votes Mr. Clay does!

I am running for the U. S. Congress District 01 and my candidacy is no joke it is very real. I ask you to give my candidacy the same respect and chance as you give to Lacy Clay and his candidacy!

My name is Candice “Britt” Britton and I am running for U. S. Congress District 01 and I respectfully ask for your vote and support. Please visit my campaign site at www.candicebritton.com

The votes have not been counted yet. Please don’t discourage the constituents in District from going to vote. Why should anyone in District 01 go and vote if Lacy Clay has no real opposition and cannot be voted out of office?

Your words have influence and power!

Democratic Candidate
Candice “Britt” Britton

Candice “Britt” Britton is one of Hillary Clinton’s 18 million.  She was not invisible to Hillary, and I am going to make sure she is not invisible to the voters of District 1 in Missouri in every way within my power!   Please help viralize her candidacy.  Visit her website.  Contribute to her campaign if you can.  Let’s give Britt a fighting chance for the people she so much wants to represent.   Here is what she said in an email to me tonight.

I went to a fish fry this evening way up north in my district 01. When I introduced myself to the folks their eyes lit up and they poured their hearts out. As I looked into their eyes,  their words “you have my vote”  with a smile and a sparkle in their eyes filled my heart with love for them,  and I don’t want to let them down. For me this campaign is truly for them,  and I just pray I can go to Washington DC and be their voice!

Read Full Post »

Afghan Women Wary of Government Negotiations with Taliban

This, from the Washington Post,  is seriously disturbing.  Settling differences is, or should be a good thing, but settling them in such a way that a significant portion of the population is excluded from the negotiations is NOT a good thing.  I just do not trust Hamid Karzai to do the best thing for women.   I think he simply does not care.

Afghan women fear loss of hard-won progress
By Karin Brulliard
Tuesday, March 16, 2010; A01

LAGHMAN, AFGHANISTAN — The head-to-toe burqas that made women a faceless symbol of the Taliban’s violently repressive rule are no longer required here. But many Afghan women say they still feel voiceless eight years into a war-torn democracy, and they point to government plans to forge peace with the Taliban as a prime example.

Gender activists say they have been pressing the administration of President Hamid Karzai for a part in any deal-making with Taliban fighters and leaders, which is scheduled to be finalized at a summit in April. Instead, they said, they have been met with a silence that they see as a dispiriting reminder of the limits of progress Afghan women have made since 2001.

“We have not been approached by the government — they never do,” said Samira Hamidi, country director of the Afghan Women’s Network, an umbrella group. “The belief is that women are not important,” she said, describing a mind-set that she said “has not been changed in the past eight years.”

The remarks below are so frustratingly paternalistic and chauvinistic that I want to scream! Such a typical stance. The women are close-minded, and the Taliban just want to protect them. Right! It is awfully hard to be open-minded when you cannot SEE and have to stay trapped at home. Women have new lives in Afghanistan. If these men cannot accept it, they should be voted out.

Arsala Rahmani, a lawmaker and former Taliban government official, said he thought women’s activists were being close-minded, defying what he called “a mother’s duty to always try to unite their sons.” He said that the Taliban restricted women to protect them from conflict — not out of ideological misogyny — and that Omar and his fighters would accept any ideas the Afghan public favors.

READ THE ARTICLE HERE>>>

Read Full Post »

Some GOOD News: A victory for women!

When Iraq, under the orders of the late Saddam Hussein,  invaded and annexed Kuwait on August 2, 1990, the United States and allies were galvanized into action that was christened accrding to its two stages, Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm. Iraqi forces were expelled from Kuwait,  and its sovereignty was restored.

One of the reasons for the swift and strong action was that Kuwait is an ally in an important location in a critical region. Another reason Americans were especially supportive of the war was that video coming out of Kuwait showed us an unusually free and open Arab state where young people dressed as they pleased, many spoke English, and young women appeared to be uncommonly equal to young men in their ability to circulate, speak out, and obtain an education without being segregated by sex.

So in recognition of Kuwait’s forward secular vision and enlightened treatment of women, today we can celebrate yet a new breakthrough by Kuwait. Today, according to the BBC, the Kuwaiti constitutional court ruled that the women of Kuwait have a constitutional right to obtain a passport without the permission of their husbands. This is enormous, and Kuwait stands as a shining example of gender equity, not just for its Middle Eastern neighbors, but for many countries outside that region as well.

When I arrived in Haiti, a married woman could have neither a passport nor a bank account without her husband’s permission. I do not know whether that law has been changed. Spousal permission is still required in many countries for the ordinary business of life. This must change. (I can almost hear our Secretary of State saying those words.)

Here is an excerpt from the BBC article: Kuwaiti women win passport rights

Kuwaiti women will be able to obtain their own passport without the consent of their husbands, following a ruling by the country’s constitutional court.

The court, whose decisions are final, said the previous requirement was in violation of guarantees of freedom and gender equality in the constitution.

The decision came about when a woman complained her husband had prevented her from leaving the country.

The country’s first female MPs were elected in May 2009.

The article abolished by the court dated back to Kuwait’s 1962 passport law which required a husband’s signature on a woman’s passport application.

Aseel al-Awadhi, one of the new MPs, welcomed the passport law ruling as a “victory for constitutional principles that puts an end to this injustice against Kuwaiti women”.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE…

So today the Homegirls applaud the Kuwaiti Constitutional Court,  and congratulate our Kuwaiti sisters AND our enlightened brothers over there for taking the right step for women, for human rights, and for further Kuwaiti participation in the global economy.

Read Full Post »