Google’s Eric Schmidt spurns Obama cabinet post offer

Google Chairman Eric “Schmidt, 57, was offered the job of Treasury or Commerce Secretary or a new ‘Secretary of Business’ slot, according to the Washington Examiner,” Jennifer O’Mahony reports for The Telegraph.

“Mr Schmidt’s rebuttal was swift, however, as he told the Wall Street Journal in an interview yesterday: ‘I said last time and I’ve said again that Google is my home. I have no interest in working for the federal government,'” O’Mahony reports. “Mr Schmidt played in a key role in the re-election of President Barack Obama last month, helping to oversee Google’s $700,000 donation to his campaign.”

O’Mahony reports, “Mr Schmidt also helped to promote Obama’s jobs bill in 2011 when the President asked Congress for a new round of stimulus spending and was faced with deadlock after Republicans rejected key elements of the plans.”

“The news comes as Anna Wintour, the Editor-in-Chief of US Vogue, was announced as a possible candidate for the post of US ambassador to the UK or France,” O’Mahony reports. “Wintour co-hosted a $40,000 a head event in June at actress Sarah Jessica Parker’s home, and in August hosted a Connecticut dinner that cost $35,800 per person at movie mogul Harvey Weinstein’s house. By the end of the campaign she was one of Mr Obama’s top ten fundraisers.”

Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers too numerous to mention individually for the heads up.]

Related article:
Obama to reward Google’s Schmidt with Cabinet post? – December 5, 2012

43 Comments

  1. Good call by Schmidt.

    One recalls the time back in the early 1990s when the Clintons were seducing John Sculley for the DoC Secretary’s nomination itself, but the appointment went instead to DNC Chairman Ron Brown, who’s airplane smashed into a mountain in Croatia.

    Or maybe one doesn’t recall that.

    1. There are those who think otherwise:

      “To those who have criticized the looks of Sarah Jessica Parker, I say neigh. If it would behoove you to have some common courtsey, you should stop making such unbridled remarks. It’s unfair to saddle her with the burden of ugliness. Someone needs to take the reins here and say, whoaaa, this is going too far. Why do we need to trot out these same cracks everytime her name comes up? If she were coming to my town, I’d definately pony up the cash to see her.” (Anon.)

  2. Schmidt makes far more as Google Chairman than he might as a cabinet member.

    The following scares me:

    ““The news comes as Anna Wintour, the Editor-in-Chief of US Vogue, was announced as a possible candidate for the post of US ambassador to the UK or France,”

    Ambassador to the UK is an IMPORTANT post, not an honoraria for a big donor. What is Obama thinking?

        1. Not short enough.
          The heavy damage will be done easily in that time frame. The people who made poor choices in life hoisted OBummer to the top so they could continue their government free ride. The rest of us will do nothing but suffer for it. I guess the bright side is when the small businesses go under, and the owners and employees end up on public assistance too, then these newly impoverished will vote Democrat too next time so their freebees will continue. Clever way to keep expanding your voting base.

      1. Consider the latest idiocy, reported just today. Despite Egypt’s shift from US ally to US-hating Islamist state, the US is going ahead with delivery of 20 F-16 fighter jets, funded by US taxpayers. (They were ordered back in 2010.)

        Even under Jimmy Carter the US wasn’t that stupid. The F-16 goes back to the late 1970s, and few countries then were able to get it. One country slated to receive them was Iran, then a US ally under the Shah. When he was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution, the US cancelled plans to deliver the planes (already being manufactured) to Iran. Since for budgetary reasons the USAF couldn’t immediately absorb them, they were offered to Israel, which bought them.

        1. What, you thought a Democrat was any less owned by the military industrial complex than a Republican would be?

          Notice that even in your example, the corporation that made those fighters didn’t lose out. You think they would allow that to happen? Too much campaign finance money at stake.

    1. I can’t recall things exactly, but if memory serves me right, the ambassadorship to “glamour” Euro destinations has been used in the past quite often to reward people who helped elect Presidents. In fact, I remember vaguely John F. Kennedy doing something like that.

      Besides, I don’t think becoming Vogue Editor-in-Chief is within the reach of someone without the required level of mental and inter-personal capabilities.

    2. She would be walking in the shoes of five previous US Presidents …

      John Adams (1785–1788)
      James Monroe (1803–1807)
      John Quincy Adams (1815–1817)
      Martin Van Buren (1831–1832)
      James Buchanan (1853–1856)

      … but they ain’t Jimmy Choo shoes.

    3. What is Obama thinking?

      Probably about the same thing as when he tossed the Department of State under the bus by giving to Hillary as a consolation prize. Who cares about the job she’s supposed to do, when there’s a momentary PR gain to be had?

      -jcr

  3. I’m not a democrat nor republican and never supported Obama.

    That said, the “Washington Examiner” is NOT a newspaper, it’s essentially a blog that is just as reliable as Wikipedia. There’s no editors or fact checking. Might or might not be true. Wouldn’t surprise me either way.

    Besides, it would make more sense to put someone from Goooooogle into the No Such Agency. The Treasury Department is passe in comparison.

    Every President has used a lot of the Ambassadorships to reward political friends and donors. Most US embassies have a “Station Chief” (of the Covert Intervention Agency) that is often more powerful than the Ambassador.

    1. I am not an expert but I am pretty sure that the NYT, with many fact checkers, gets most political stories wrong. The reason – it is not an actual newspaper with an objective of getting the news out, damn the consequences. Instead, it is a PR publication of the Democrat National Committee. To test this, research how many stories this “newspaper” did actually reporting on the story of the death of the American ambassador to Libya in the weeks right before the election. Ambassadors are not often found dead under strange circumstances, except when Democrats run things, yet this story was almost never reported on page 1. And the NYT accepted the administration stories as fact, with no skepticism, despite the fact the administration story was known by all to be a fabrication within a few days. Just where is that journalistic zeal for truth? Not at the NYT. But I can guarantee there is a lot more honest reporting at the Washington Examiner. By the way, one way of assessing the NYT is the bottom line. How is it doing financially? Is it making money? Is it appealing to a broad market, or just people who work for the DNC?

  4. It does take a weasel to know ho to work with the people in Washington.

    That said, why on earth would he take a job where he would have to take a big cut in pay and have to work really hard? (not to mention be accountable for his actions)

        1. You tell them Scott. Obama is working hard all the time, except when he is golfing (200 times a year), at Martha’s Vineyard, vacationing at Vail, vacationing in Hawaii (for three weeks starting about now while the country heads over the cliff), or partying with JayZ and Beyonce, or with the home boys in Chicago in the men’s sauna. Other than those days, he is busy working – spending huge amounts of money and devising new taxes. It’s a dirty job, but someone has to do it.

          1. The actual number of golf outings is a bit over 100 to date, which is still a record. He’s about to head off for an extended family vacation in Hawaii. Estimated cost to taxpayers: $4 million.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.