International Women’s Day Properly Observed, Thanks To Clinton, Obama
Thanks to the efforts of President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, International Women’s Day, which marks the 100th anniversary this year, finally gets a credible, proper observation from the United States.
Today, governments and non-profit organizations around the world, mark the 100th anniversary of  International Women’s Day, begun in 1911, inspired by the work of German socialist and  feminist Clara Zeitkin, a former member of the German Reichstag, who died in exile in Moscow in 1933. It was discrimination against women that brought out over one million women–and men–from the socialist movement onto the streets of Austria, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland on March 19, 1911 that began this observation.
Many Russian women activists and feminists, who participated in the Russian revolution in 1917 played a key role in establishing observation of International Women’s Day in the Soviet Bloc countries that eventually spread to countries outside the Eastern Bloc. In 1975, during the UN Year of Women, International Women’s Day was designated to be observed on March 8.
As an American woman feminist, who has worked in a dozen countries and traveled to at least 40 countries during my lifetime, I have spent many International Womens’ Days abroad in former communist countries that celebrate this day to great fanfare as a tribute to the political and economic advances sought and achieved by women around the world. But most Americans know very little about International Women’s Day and our government has rarely taken a considerable moment to recognize the achievements of women in America and around the world on this day, but that has changed dramatically with the election of President Barack Obama.
To his credit, President Obama declared March to be National Women’s History Month and recognized the significance of the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day in his proclamation, but more importantly he spelled out that empowering women and girls is a policy priority:
My Administration has elevated the rights of women and girls abroad as a critical aspect of our foreign and national security policy. Empowering women across the globe is not simply the right thing to do, it is also smart foreign policy. This knowledge is reflected in the National Security Strategy of the United States, which recognizes that countries are more peaceful and prosperous when their female citizens enjoy equal rights, equal voices, and equal opportunities.
His astute nomination of Hillary Clinton to be the nation’s top diplomat has been the driving force behind the Administration’s elevated priority of supporting women and girls, especially abroad. Clinton, who declared in Beijing in 1995 as then-First Lady of the U.S. that “Human Rights are Women’s Rights, and Women’s Rights are Human Rights”–galvanized women across the globe and has enabled Clinton to become argubly the foremost powerful advocate on behalf of women and girls in the world today.
I happened to be working in Haiti and later in The Gambia when Clinton made THE speech in Beijing and I will never forget how enthralled and enthusiastic women’s reactions were to it around the world. It was an electrifying moment.
This week, Clinton, as Secretary of State, is leveraging her position and power to the maximum by putting substance to this paradigm-shifting three-pronged agenda.
(Compare this year’s observation to one just seven years ago, as then-president George W. Bush’s actions amid his $1.5 billion “Healthy Marriage Initiative” were protested on International Women’s Day.)
Yesterday, at the State Department she  announced a new program entitled  “100 Years, 100 Women, Empowering Women and Girls Through International Exchanges” that brought together 92 women from six different continents to the State Department, a first of 26 similar events that will take place over the coming year. These women will travel the U.S. sharing their experiences, while learning about America. Today, she and First Lady Michelle Obama, presided over the 2011 International Women of Courage Awards ceremony  recognizing the courage and work of 10 significant women, including Roza Otunbayeva, the first woman President of the Kyrgyz Republic and of a Central Asian state.
The third leg of this comprehensive policy includes a public-private partnership with Goldman Sachs called “10,000 Women” which aims to train 10,000 underserved women around the world with business and management education through a five-year investment. Lloyd Blankfein, Chairman and CEO of Goldman, announced at the State Department ceremony today that its program would achieve education of 5,000 women by summer.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2XIineVXCAc%3Ffs%3D1%26hl%3Den_US
Clinton, who has said publicly on many occasions that she will leave government service at the end of Obama’s first term to work on advancing the rights and interests of women and girls, spells out her vision and goals in comments made yesterday:
So for me, investing in women and girls is smart. It pays off. It’s not only the right thing to do – and I see some heads nodding – because you’ve seen the differences in the lives around you, in your own life as to what it means for someone to believe in a girl or a woman and to give her the tools to make the most out of her own life. But it’s also true that this is important if you want to alleviate hunger – you teach women, who are most of the farmers in the world how to get more harvest out of their hard work. If you want to alleviate poverty, you give women access to credit and opportunities to actually start to generate income for themselves and their families. And you have been working in these and so many areas. You are established and emerging leaders from 92 countries. You are leaders from the academic world, from business, from civil society, from the media. You are pioneers and you are fearless supporters of those who need a champion.
Obama and Clinton’s leadership is critical to adopting policies and programs that will effectively empower women and girls–advancing their human rights–will stabilize transitional democracies and by providing education and job opportunities to women, will help lift families and communities out of poverty. Across the board today in international development funding agencies, the professionals know that by prioritizing the empowerment of women and girls, the investment will pay off exponential dividends in creating more stable societies and dynamic economies. Countries can not achieve a good standard of living, by leaving more than 50 percent of their population behind. Much work remains to be done.
Former President of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, said today that there has been “remarkable progress” since International Women’s Day was first celebrated a century ago. Bachelet, the new director of UN Women, the UN’s agency for gender equality and empowerment of women, which was officially launched in January this year, adds that gender equality remains a distant goal because women still suffer widespread discrimination and lack political and economic clout.
According to Clinton, today, 850 million women and girls are alive between the ages of 10 and 24 years old, the largest generation of women in the history of our civilization. Hillary Clinton, who declared women’s rights are human rights 16 years ago in Beijing, has miles to go before she leaves this important work to others.
Happy International Women’s Day!
Tanya L. Domi is an Adjunct Assistant Professor of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University, who teaches about human rights in Eurasia and is a Harriman Institute affiliated faculty member. Prior to teaching at Columbia, Domi worked internationally for more than a decade on issues related to democratic transitional development, including political and media development, human rights, gender issues, sex trafficking, and media freedom.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
Former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said on Monday that she is “done supporting” her former party—but don’t expect her to join the Democratic party anytime soon.
Greene announced her disillusionment with the GOP on Monday afternoon in a tweet.
“Tucker is not the only one who is done supporting the Republican Party. There is A LOT of us that are absolutely fed up and will not support a party that betrays its voters and country. That does not mean we are turning into Democrats either. But we are DONE with the America LAST Republican Party,” Greene wrote.
Tucker is not the only one who is done supporting the Republican Party.
There is A LOT of us that are absolutely fed up and will not support a party that betrays its voters and country.
That does not mean we are turning into Democrats either.
But we are DONE with the America…
— Marjorie Taylor Greene 🇺🇸 (@mtgreenee) June 22, 2026
She referred to comments made last week by pundit Tucker Carlson. Carlson appeared on the Can’t Be Censored podcast Thursday, saying he would refrain from supporting either major party, and admitted “I’m not sure what I’m going to do.”
READ MORE: ‘Gaslight America’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Blasts Trump Ahead of His Trip to Georgia
“How could I or any American voter support a political party that’s not loyal to the United States. That puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens. It’s not possible to vote for people like that, and I’m not going to,” Carlson said, according to Mediaite, referring to America’s long-time ally Israel.
Greene famously broke with President Donald Trump earlier this year when she called for the release of the FBI files relating to disgraced financier and sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein. A former staunch ally of Trump, the two started trading barbs. Greene resigned from the House this January. Greene has long called for an isolationist foreign policy, criticizing America’s involvement in Ukraine as well as the current conflict with Iran.
Given that Greene said she has no plans on moving leftward in her politics, it’s unclear if she will refrain from voting or if she’ll throw her lot in with a third party. While American politics are primarily driven by the two major parties, a number of smaller parties also exist.
Greene may find a home in the Libertarian party, the third-largest party by voter registration. The Libertarian party has drifted rightward since its founding in 1971. While initially economically conservative but politically liberal, after 2022, the paleolibertarian Mises Caucus gained control of the party. Paleolibertarianism was developed by anarcho-capitalists, and embraces cultural conservatism. Some of the most widely known paleolibertarians include former Representative Ron Paul and the current president of Argentina, Javier Milei.
Third parties struggle to gain traction in the United States. The closest a third party has come to widespread support was the Reform Party, founded by H. Ross Perot during the 1996 presidential election after he won 18.9% of the popular vote in the 1992 presidential election as an independent candidate. Reform won 8.4% of the popular vote in the 1996 election, but no third-party or independent candidate has been as successful as Perot since.
However, the electoral college makes it difficult for a third-party presidential candidate to be elected at all. Third-party presidential candidates are often seen as spoilers for the major candidates. Perot is often believed to have won votes away from President George H.W. Bush in 1992, giving the election to President Bill Clinton. In 2000, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader was similarly accused of acting as a spoiler for Vice President Al Gore, leading to the election of President George W. Bush.
Third parties, however, have a better track record in down-ballot races. For example, Kshama Sawant won election to the Seattle City Council in 2014 as a member of the Socialist Alternative party. She held office until 2024, when she declined to seek reelection. She is currently running for a seat in the House of Representatives as an independent.
Image via Shutterstock
President Donald Trump announced on Monday that Iran “will agree” to allow weapon inspectors into the country in a slightly confusing social media post.
“Everybody is fully aware that Iran will agree to have Major Weapons Inspections in order to ensure ‘Nuclear Honesty’ long into the future,” the president wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.
Vice President JD Vance has been handling the negotiations with Iran to end the military conflict started by the United States and Israel at the end of February. Vance said earlier today that inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency would be allowed to enter Iran. The inspectors could be in the country as soon as Monday, according to the Washington Post.
READ MORE: Large Majority of Americans Say Iran Conflict Should End, Hasn’t Met Any of Trump’s Goals
Trump’s wording, however, is somewhat hard to parse. When he says “everyone is fully aware,” is Trump referring to Vance’s Monday announcement that had been widely reported? Or is Trump attempting to cast doubt, suggesting Iran may somehow be pulling a fast one, allowing inspections to provide cover for a weapons program?
Either way, the allowing of weapons inspectors into Iran is similar to what former President Barack Obama’s administration negotiated for in 2015. The Obama-era deal called for IAEA inspectors to make sure Iran was complying with the deal, and was not developing nuclear weapons. But in 2018, after Trump ended the agreement, Iran started to block IAEA inspectors from parts of their nuclear program. Since then, IAEA inspectors do not know the status of Iran’s enriched uranium, according to the Washington Post.
One year ago from Monday, the U.S. struck Iranian sites believed to hold stockpiles of enriched uranium. Since then, Trump has claimed that the strike “completely and totally obliterated” the country’s nuclear enrichment facilities, however, this has never been verified. Even at the time, the Pentagon said that Iran’s nuclear program had only been “degraded…by two years.” Trump’s national intelligence director testified prior to the strike that there was no evidence that Iran’s existing nuclear program was meant to build weapons, according to the Military Times.
Iran has long promised not to build or obtain nuclear weapons. In 1970, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which deemed the country a non-nuclear state.
While Trump has warned that Iran could have a nuclear bomb “within six months,” the first report from the International Atomic Energy Agency since the Iran conflict started says that there has been no major change to the country’s nuclear program, according to Reuters.
Image via Reuters
Six grand jury subpoenas were quashed by a federal judge Wednesday, when it was decided that the subpoenas were filed to retaliate against Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s administration and the city governments of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz of the District of Minnesota made his ruling public on Monday, granting the motion requested by the Minnesota officials to quash grand jury subpoenas related to Minnesota declaring itself to be a “sanctuary” state.
Last December, the Department of Homeland Security deployed over 3,000 agents to Minnesota as part of the largest immigration-related operation in the department’s history, Operation Metro Surge. After the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by DHS agents, the state of Minnesota as well as the twin cities challenged Operation Metro Surge in court, prompting President Donald Trump to rail against the local officials on social media.
READ MORE: Trump Dangles Another Insurrection Act Threat for Minnesota
Days after Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul filed suit, news reports revealed that the Department of Justice had begun to investigate Walz and Minnesota Mayor Jacob Frey. Trump administration officials said that by not supporting the actions of DHS, Walz and Frey were breaking the law.
The Minnesotan officials argued that the subpoenas were “issued as part of an unconstitutional effort to coerce” them into working with DHS and ICE.
Judge Schiltz found that though grand juries traditionally “have broad investigatory powers,” the subpoenas had exceeded those powers. Schiltz agreed that the subpoenas were in violation of the Tenth Amendment, allowing states some degree of autonomy from the federal government.
Schiltz wrote that he had “no doubt” the subpoenas were issued for the “forbidden purposes” of attempting to “harass” or “coerce” Walz and Frey “into taking official action…. a blatantly unlawful and unethical use the grand-jury process.”
“On the one hand, the evidence that the challenged subpoenas were issued for unlawful reasons is overwhelming. On the other hand, the Department has struggled-without success-to identify a single plausible investigatory justification for the subpoenas,” Schiltz wrote, pointing out that the “public record… is replete with direct evidence of the Trump administration—including the highest-ranking officials of the Department—threatening and attempting to punish states and localities that have adopted ‘sanctuary’ policies.”
“To be clear, the Court agrees with the Department that a grand-jury subpoena need not be supported by probable cause. At the same time, a grand-jury subpoena cannot be issued for an improper purpose. The fact that connections between the information sought in the subpoenas and any possible criminal violation range from extremely weak to nonexistent only adds to the overwhelming evidence that these subpoenas were not issued to investigate, but to harass, coerce, and retaliate,” Schiltz added.
Image via Shutterstock
Marjorie Taylor Greene Says She’s ‘Done Supporting’ The GOP: ‘Party Betrays Its Voters’
Donald Trump Says Iran ‘Will Agree to Major Weapons Inspections’ to Ensure ‘Nuclear Honesty’
Federal Judge Quashes ‘Retaliatory’ Subpoenas Against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz
GOP Rep Demands Biden’s Pardons to Be ‘Declared Null and Void’
Large Majority of Americans Say Iran Conflict Should End, Hasn’t Met Any of Trump’s Goals
News1 day agoMarjorie Taylor Greene Says She’s ‘Done Supporting’ The GOP: ‘Party Betrays Its Voters’
IDIOCY2 days agoGOP Rep Demands Biden’s Pardons to Be ‘Declared Null and Void’
News1 day agoFederal Judge Quashes ‘Retaliatory’ Subpoenas Against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz
BAD PRESIDENT2 days agoLarge Majority of Americans Say Iran Conflict Should End, Hasn’t Met Any of Trump’s Goals
News1 day agoDonald Trump Says Iran ‘Will Agree to Major Weapons Inspections’ to Ensure ‘Nuclear Honesty’
