Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer

According to politico, Hillary Clinton is actually undecided on the offer, and may even reject it. Some speculate the "vetting" is the problem, while the lack of certainty is actually consistent with what Clinton has been thinking all along.

Press reports that portray Clinton as willing to accept the job - once the Obama transition team vets Bill Clinton's philanthropic and business ventures - are inaccurate, one Clinton insider told Politico.

"A lot of the speculation and reporting is out ahead of the facts here," said the person, who requested anonymity. "She is still weighing this, independent of President Clinton's work."

Clinton, the person said, remains deeply "torn" between the possibility of serving in Obama's cabinet and remaining in the Senate to "help pass health care and work on a broad range of domestic issues."

That comment jibes with what others close to Clinton have been saying since the Secretary of State chatter began last week: that Clinton is conflicted and the deal far from done, despite screaming headlines in outlets including the U.K.'s Guardian newspaper claiming the offer was made and accepted.

I hope she accepts the offer, but this is a win-win for her either way. The fact is that if she is SOS, she loses a Senate seat and elected office which is hard to gain back, and she has to abandon domestic issues, which are her biggest selling point. She'd also be immune to mistakes the Obama admin could make. But I'd love to see her on the world stage, as SOS is the closest to being President she can get right now.



Display:


Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (2.00 / 2)

ugh...just get it over with already. The leaking and speculation and over-analysis is ridiculous. I guess we can now expect another few days of feverish Hardball hand-wringing. I hear Wolf Blitzer is being dispatched to sift through her trash in search of clues.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:27:47 PM EST

Wolf is actually visiting Borat's chicken farm (none / 0)

at Kazakhstan. He is currently traveling on a donkey trying to shift through the piles of cowdung to get to the clues to unsavoury Clintonian Kazakh deals.


by louisprandtl on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:47:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

Wow, still talking about HRC as being the inevitable candidate...


by oyo on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:34:25 PM EST

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

polital cover---geez hill,gotta pul my offer to you from last week since bill vetting looks bad..that's ok sez hil, i decided to reject it anyway

truth--hil, would you accept it if i offered it to you?--hil replies hell yes-so obama sez ok you got it subject to bill vetting--but keep it under wraps for awhile ok

hil to her staff--not sure i even want it--knowing staff will confide to press

if bull vetting ok-hil will accept instantly-bored with the senate, all those months on the campaign trail goes to one's head


by ionsys on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:35:35 PM EST

if this were really the "vetting," (none / 0)

something would have leaked to the press by now. I doubt its the "vetting."


by Lakrosse on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:45:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

Hillary haters=malicious TROLLS. Jeez..chill!!!


by cxfornier on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:42:45 PM EST

Kennedy Offers Hillary Task Force Leadership (2.00 / 1)

Ted Kennedy has offered Clinton to head a task force to reform the nation's health care system. I predict that Clinton will take the offer and not become Secretary of State. The Clintons would pay a high price for her becoming Secretary of State. Secretary of States can be fired by the president anytime and most only last for one presidential term. Bill would also have quit many of his charitable work activities.

Obama is intriqued by Lincoln's team of rivals. Lincoln even picked a Democrat to be vice president. Unfortunately, when Lincoln was assassinated, his team of rivals was the new governmnent.


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:51:53 PM EST

Re: Kennedy Offers Hillary Task Force Leadership (2.00 / 3)

I was thinking the same thing, actually, when I saw that offer. It's relatively generous on the part of Kennedy, and much closer to what she really wants to do.


"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."
by vcalzone on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:54:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy Offers Hillary Task Force Leadership (none / 0)

he did? I missed that. I thought he was 'cool' to the idea. Wonder if this means ... (nothing nice about Teddy, censored).  Hillary will do what she thinks will be best for us. I'd guess that's SOS.  It's not for the faint of heart to give up a senate place to serve the whole world.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

not to mention Secretaries of State (2.00 / 1)

don't get the credit when foreign policy goes well, the President does. Why would Hillary do a near thankless job when she can get massive points on health care, her signature issue? She'll have a top platform on which to run by 2016 if it passes plus she'll be in the history books.


by Lakrosse on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:55:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think her biggest problem is (none / 0)

that she is already in the history books for a great many firsts, hence the conflict on what to do next.

Its a supreme conflict with what her mother always told here, "grow where you are planted".  Well, which way is up, now?


by linc on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:03:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what do you mean, (none / 0)

because I know you're gonna parrot how the MSNBC:Profiles always says "was the first First Lady to be subpoenaed," blah blah blah and the like. She's the first female to be a viable primary candidate and first First Lady to win elected office. THOSE are her firsts. Show some honour to the Clintons


by Lakrosse on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:13:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll show her honor (none / 0)

for plenty of reasons but her last name ain't one of them.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:14:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'll show her honor (none / 0)

don't need to, fortunately. She's always had her own record to run on.  Bill owes her for her help, but she doesn't own his administration.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:48:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'll show her honor (none / 0)

lolwhut?  She would never have been able to carpet-bag her way to the Senate in 2000 without being first lady.  Maybe she could have worked her way up to President by another path starting in the 80s or 90s, but she owes a whole lot to his administration.


I come here for the lulz.
by username on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 10:03:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'll show her honor (none / 0)

Yeah, I'm not sure if that "always" is quite accurate.  She's always had her own record to run on?  Like since before 1992-2000?

That said, her record in the Senate has been impressive, and that's what I give respect to.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 05:36:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think she still wants to be president (2.00 / 1)

If Obama is a successful and popular president in 2016, Clinton would have an opportunity to run again. In 2016, if times are good, voters may look to a candidate who symbolizes continuity instead of change, and that could serve Clinton well. I think remaining in the senate is probably a better platform for a 2016 run rather than being Secretary of State for a few years and then to leave the public stage. It would probably be better for Clinton to become Secretary of State in an Obama second term rather than first term if she wants to become secretary of state and run for the presidency again.


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:18:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think she still wants to be president (none / 0)

she wanted to, but Barack will get eight years, and the country won't be in such bad shape and she may want to pass the torch to a new generation. She's busy promoting women in elected office, I would not be at all surprised if she's got a few names in mind now, that she plans to put forward.  Hillary will always be working for us, of that I have no doubt, it's in her nature sort of, but her ambition lies in being effective, not necessarily in being grand.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:51:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

But what if their is no money for health care? What would she do then.


by venician on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:24:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kennedy Needs a Strong Ally Health Care (none / 0)

Universal Health Care is Kennedy's big ambition. Clinton is a strong supporter and would put pressure on Obama to make health care reform the top priority next to solving the current economic crisis.  Thus, my guess is that Kennedy wants to keep Clinton in the senate. While Obama agrees with the concept of universal health care, it is not his top priority; energy independence is Obama's top priority other than the immediate economic crisis.

But money is a big problem. The last Bush budget for the 2008-2009 year will probably be over a trillion dollars. This is simply incredible and unbelievable. Fifty years from now, historians will be amazed on how incompetent the Bush Administration was.


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:34:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Correction (none / 0)

The last Bush Budget Deficit will be over a trillion dollars


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:36:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy Needs a Strong Ally Health Care (none / 0)

no need to pressure Barack on health care.  He's right there, and he's said already that if mandates are necessary to make it work, then he'll be for mandates, cause, he wants it to work.  

Barack used to say that he and Hillary agree on 99 percent of everything, and I suspect that one percent was which one should be president.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:53:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (2.00 / 1)

There's another potential issue I must admit hadn't occurred to me before which is her campaign debt.  I assume as a senator she could eventually raise the money through campaign contributions to repay this but I have no idea what her options would be as an appointee to cabinet.  Do you know what the potential issues are in regards to the choice she is now facing?


by Shaun Appleby on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:25:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

Interestingly enough Politico posted a piece on exactly this topic since I wondered about it:


If Hillary Rodham Clinton becomes Barack Obama's secretary of state, she could wipe away her lingering $7.6 million presidential campaign debt.

As the nation's top diplomat, she would be barred by tradition and ethics rules from partisan political activity, including raising cash to pay off debt from her unsuccessful bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

And that could give her a powerful case to make to the Federal Election Commission about why it should forgive her campaign debt through a settlement process not unlike filing for bankruptcy.

Kenneth P Vogel - State: HRC's ticket to debt forgiveness? Politico 18 Nov 08

I thought it was a legitimate question which might weigh on her decision, apparently it's not seen as a problem.


by Shaun Appleby on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 12:40:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

Although, according to this retiring her debt has a wrinkle too:


One of her best options for whittling down the debt was rolling it over to her 2012 Senate reelection campaign--an option that would seem to be off the table if she accepts the cabinet post. While she could still file for debt settlement with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), that would forbid her from ever running for public office.

Amand Silverman - Secretary of Debt The New Republic 19 Nov 08

Is this true?  Seems to raise the ante on the choice somehow.


by Shaun Appleby on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 02:00:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

I think assuming that she is going to run 8 years from now is thinking about 6 years ahead. I think a far more likely path has her ending in the Supreme Court at this point.

Don't get me wrong I think she would be a strong candidate 8 years from now but we would be foolish to think that age is not an issue.


Hey guys? You know we won right? You can stop the doooooomsaying now.
by JDF on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 11:03:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

No Supreme Court!!! She has made that clear in several interviews...NO NO NO she doesn't want it and we Hillfans don't want her to go there.....

It's B-O-R-I-N-G.....she is too charismatic for the SC.....


by nikkid on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 11:37:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

She is too "charismatic?"

I won't disagree with you that she is charismatic. She is very charismatic.

However, that shouldn't be how the determination is made. Nor should it be what you "Hillfans" (I guess I don't qualify as a fan since she wasn't my first choice,) make your personal determinations on.

The only question anyone should be asking is this: Where can she do the most good over the next 8 years?

If the answer is the Senate than that is great (I would love to see her as Majority Leader, but I don't see it happening right now.) If the answer is SoS than that is fine too...

But if the answer is that she could spend the next 15-20 years being a voice for progressive issues on the Bench than that would be a wonderful thing.

Oh, a word of advice, I would vote for her in 8 years if she ran...but don't bet on it and don't hope for it. It is 8 years from now and we have no idea who our strongest candidate will be by then.


Hey guys? You know we won right? You can stop the doooooomsaying now.
by JDF on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 11:48:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

Wouldn't she have to be a progressive in order to be a voice for progressive causes?


by ReillyDiefenbach on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 09:59:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

She is for Universal Healthcare, she is for the reform of NAFTA, she is stridently pro choice, and stridently supports other women's issues. She has consistently, along with her husband, stood up for minorities and for the impoverished.

Please explain to me how she would not be a good voice for progressive causes? Is she pitch perfect when it comes to progressive causes? No. Then again, neither am I and I bet that you aren't either.

There is no such thing as the combination of purity and relevance. Hell, there is no such thing as true purity; and if that is what you are looking for you should go hang out with Nader and Kucinich.


Hey guys? You know we won right? You can stop the doooooomsaying now.
by JDF on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 08:16:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

Ha - I was wondering why it was that whenever I mention that she's been clear that she doesn't want the Supreme Court I get knocked in the head by a gazillion mojos from Clintonistas.


When you start out making the "slippery slope" argument, where do you draw the line?
by Jess81 on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 02:04:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

please tell me you are kidding.  Seriously.  This whole politics thing...yeah it is referred to as a game a lot.  And yes there is quite a bit of the whole jockeying for position but don't get it mixed up with American idol.  Hilary on the Supreme Court.  Hell yeah.  I would rather see her where her intelligence and strengths can be fully realized and utilized than in a position that she can demonstrate her charisma on a daily basis.  


Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle. -Plato
by selfevident on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 05:02:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

She doesn't want it. She has said so in interviews, she's not interested in the Supreme Court.

Besides - she will probably run for Prez again, she couldn't do that as SCJ.


by nikkid on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 09:50:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not to mention Secretaries of State (none / 0)

she has also state that she doesn't want to run for president again.


Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle. -Plato
by selfevident on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 09:35:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy Offers Hillary Task Force Leadership (none / 0)

Wow, that's interesting.  


by markjay on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:17:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Either way, they both look good (none / 0)

If she does say no, Obama looks good because he reached out in a very real way, she looks good for having been asked to lead in such a high spot. Meanwhile, hopefully, Bill Richardson would still take the job if offered and would do a fantastic job.

The only one who might come out not looking great might be Bill Clinton, because the media's lead would quickly become, "Were Bill Clinton's finances too shady to hold up under scrutiny?" Both sides would fight the rumor, but what does that matter?


"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."
by vcalzone on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 05:52:03 PM EST

Re: Either way, they both look good (none / 0)

However, I think Obama needs to pick one strong woman to lead a cabinet position. (And I don't mean a deputy position or second in command position) After not considering Clinton for the vice presidency after he said he would, Obama would be in an akward position if he could not offer Clinton the job due to problems with Bill, especially if there were no women in his cabinet.


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 06:11:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Either way, they both look good (2.00 / 1)

Bill made a big mistake taking Janet Reno.  he needed a southern woman, so the story goes, but he picked on who was over her head and disloyal to the presidency, to the office.  We didn't need a freak show back then, and a public prosecutor who wrote pornography.  

Barack needs to pick the best, most experienced, most expert people he can. Many will be retirement age, and that means that he may need to replace them with their trainees down the line.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:56:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Either way, they both look good (none / 0)

I think she looks terrible if she rejects an offer! It takes her five days to think about a job offer???

Come on now. Not only that she's weakening Obama's stature by rejecting his offer and openly in my opinion signaling warfare with O..

This offer is a concession to her stature and her success during the primaries..its not a recognition of her expertise in foreign affairs...


by obama4presidente on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 07:31:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

If its taken her five days to decide then I don't think she's the right person for the job.

Its not Obama that is "vetting" anyone but the congressional committee that will have to approve the nomination. Obama's team is just going through the paces to make sure everything is ok before presenting her nomination to the Senate.

As far as her not taking the position being a win for her I have to disagree with that.. She's going to be a marginal player in the Senate... She could run for the presidency in 8 years but who is to say what will happen in 8 years? Its not hard to think that new players will emerge... For example, in 8 years I might vote for Schweitzer in the primaries..


by obama4presidente on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 07:29:22 PM EST

With 58 Senate seats (none / 0)

at least...Obama's getting whoever he wants through the Senate.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 10:03:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A marginal player?? (2.00 / 2)

I think you are out of your mind on this one man. There is absolutely no reason to believe she will be marginalized in the current Senate. She is not going to get the position I want her to have (Majority Leader,) but she is still going to be a major player.


Hey guys? You know we won right? You can stop the doooooomsaying now.
by JDF on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 11:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

ambinder has a sense of what is going on-a painful choice for hilary

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/mt/m t-tb.cgi/37409


by art3 on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:03:45 PM EST

"which are her biggest selling point." (2.00 / 0)

What's she selling?  And to whom?  She's a senator now, possibly SoS, not a candidate.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 08:13:26 PM EST

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (2.00 / 1)

Politico is reporting that Clinton has three lawyers assisting with her and Bill's vetting. Something tells me if she was not serious about the job, she would not be serious about the vetting. So, this report that she may be torn may be a way to get more leverage in bargaining the nuts and bolts of the job, i.e. Deputies, Ambassadors etc.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 01:05:54 AM EST

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

Good point, I can't see her declining the position after all of this effort.  Ambinder has a very positive take on the state of play:


The vetting of Hillary Clinton is ongoing, delicate, sensitive and private -- but not, according to people with direct knowledge of the work, acrimonious.

Despite press reports about former President Bill Clinton's resistance to turn over information about his income sources, international business dealings and foundation donors, he has instructed Cheryl Mills, the long-time Clinton lawyer overseeing the liaison with Obama's team, to collect and turn over everything requested by Obama's vetters.

Bill Clinton has also indicated, according to sources, that he would be willing to step down as the functional leader of his foundation for the duration of his wife's tenure in the Obama administration. He would readily agree, these sources say, to disclose any new sources of income and submit his speaking schedule -- and his speeches -- to State Department officials in advance.

Mark Ambinder - Inside The Clinton (ClintonS) Vet The Atlantic 18 Nov 08

Although there is some dispute on the issue of Bill's speeches, however:


The view from Camp Clinton is that the Obama Team would too severely restrict what Bill Clinton is able to do to simply make a living. One source says the Obama Team seems to think it can demand that the former president abide by the restrictions put on a general government official, which just isn't tenable.

There has even been talk of the Obama White House wanting to approve every speech the former President Gives gives, or any new source of income.

And while the former President's team says he's willing to disclose that information ahead of time, they aren't willing to submit each speech opportunity for approval.

Jake Tapper - A Wrinkle in the Obama-Clinton Negotiations ABC 18 Nov 08

What seems remarkable to me is the unprecedented level of detail we are getting about these protracted negotiations.  That must mean something but I'm darned if I know what.  It is certainly unfolding slowly amid much apparent, or perhaps manufactured, controversy.


by Shaun Appleby on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 01:22:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary might reject Sec. of State offer (none / 0)

Once again, I must ask, why would Obama strap on this media circus?  Can anyone control Bill Clinton?  I doubt it.  


by ReillyDiefenbach on Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 10:06:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.