Today's political and business landscape is populated by some (if not enough) examples of strong women who have defeated the odds. But despite sharing some core qualities of leadership with others, Hillary Clinton has defined her own style of leading that is defiantly gender neutral.
I assume at some point during campaign season I will get an interview with Secretary Clinton. I am tempted to suggest that it be a single topic so that it can get around the sound bite stuff. I would like to dig into one or two topics (go deep!) -- not slap the surface of many topics.
Candidates would be well advised to pay more attention to voter opinion, economic realities, and the shifting political tide -- and less attention to the empty racket emanating from the reflexively anti-Social Security and anti-populist peanut gallery.
Becoming a grandmother has made me think deeply about the responsibility we all share as stewards of the world we inherit and will one day pass on. Rather than make me want to slow down, it has spurred me to speed up.
In May 2006, I wrote a column for Huffington Post entitled: "SF Mayor Gavin Newsom for President." I was half-joking then, but nearly nine years later, I am completely serious.
With all of this talk of privatization ramping up, now is the time for Hillary Clinton and other Democrats to knock the idea down. Veterans will be watching.
Hillary once shared with me that she attended a wonderful Sunday school class during her years in Arkansas. She loved the people, found community, but yearned for a deeper period of study. She didn't lament, she didn't complain, she simply volunteered to teach the class herself, writing lessons from Scripture, largely around the golden rule.
We know Hillary because she has been in the public spotlight for over 40 years. We know from her work history that Hillary Clinton is a strong advocate for women's rights, civil rights, LGBT rights and the rights of those immigrants here today, so that they may have a path to citizenship.
The true magnitude of the problem for the Republican Party only becomes apparent when you compare the big blue wall to what might be called the "small red picket fence" of the consistent Republican-voting states.
Republican White House hopefuls have received better, more sympathetic press coverage than Hillary Clinton, whose page-one coverage to date has been almost devoid of positive Times treatments.
This was a strong and welcomed statement from the Obama Administration. I just wish that the president would apply this sentiment to the "religious freedom" provisions maintained by his own administration.
What does history teach us about the wisdom of going the 'easy' route and voting for candidates from political dynasties? Does being part of such a dynasty impart one with greater political wisdom or a higher level of achievement?
With progressive voice Sen. Elizabeth Warren helping lead the fast track/TPP opposition, and possible candidates Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley joining in opposition, it's time for Hillary Clinton to tell people where she stands on fast track and TPP. Will she join with working people and the 99 percent, or will she bend to the D.C./Wall Street crowd?
Rather than passing redundant religious freedom laws, we ought to be passing anti-discrimination laws because the most beautiful example of Christian witness is to show kindness, love and acceptance to each individual in our midst -- to our friends and neighbors, to strangers, and even to our enemies.
Ms. Fiorina might be able to be a strong candidate, but her path to the nomination will not be easy. There is little reason to think that Republican women will automatically support her; and while Republicans hate big government, many primary Republican voters are not exactly enamored of big business either.
With the 2016 presidential race off and running, the growing controversy over Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton's prohibited use of a private email account and server to conduct her official business as Secretary of State is certainly not going away soon.