It would be nice for the White House not to set trial balloons and let presumed nominee dangle

If I was on a list of prospective nominees, I would tell the President no thank you.

It sends a horrible message. It is basically using up capable people as cannon fodder.

the official "person to blame" for Benghazi as far as the low-info public is concerned, and she had nothing to do with it. And she can do nothing publicly to repair that. They should have let her go forward to a nomination hearing, in which case she could present and defend her record, even if she fails to get the votes. Same with Hagel--he's a big boy, let him defend himself against bogus charges of anti-Semitism and defend his apparently "too-peace-loving" record in public hearings. Edit to add: Obama is way too risk and conflict-averse.

Trial balloons are put out there for a reason
We learn that Rice is compromised because of her investments and Hagel is a homophobe .. And POTUS did stand up for Rice. He refused to fight when he learned she was not squeaky clean. Libya was not the issue. Besides I am categorically opposed to having any republicans in a democratic president's cabinet.

It may or may not be "fair" to these supposed nominees. But, it is more than fair to the people of this country. I would prefer the President take all the time he needs, and make sure he chooses the right person for the job--without having to rush his decision merely to keep his nominee from being subjected to more poo-flinging. Both the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense have to deal with shit that's way worse than what McCain and his ilk are dishing out here. If these people can't handle it, then I sure as hell don't want them dealing with the likes of Netanyahoo, Putin, al-Assad...

As for Republicans - he had Gates as his first Secretary of State and Ray Lahood as Secretary of Transportation. And there was another senator - cannot remember his name now. I think that he wanted him to head the commerce dept. but he (the Republican) declined.

too much baggage.

Why waste it making up things about the White House?

I don't think we know anything on Secretary of State other than that the only two people seriously considered and vetted were Kerry and Rice. I think it also safe to say that where Kerry, per several articles, asked his supporters to not lobby on his behalf, Rice actively had her proponents do so. I suspect that this difference had no impact - Obama knew what each brought to the job and it was his choice.

I do think that one thing that the media never suggested was that perhaps putting Rice in the position of being on those 5 talk shows was to some degree a "test". A more political person, such as Hillary Clinton or John Kerry, could have navigated the hearings by staying within what was known. (If you think this unfair, I remind you that there have been 10s of things the media called "tests" for the 2004 Presidential nominee with a far higher political and even international profile.)

I think that Obama's defense of Rice was something that ANY high level official should get against unfair charges. Each time, he took pains to say both that this would not stop him AND tha he had not made his choice.

I have MORE problems with the WP using the criticism to say that IF Obama did not then nominate her, the person they had blatantly favored for the nomination, it sent a message that he was weak.

and I will politely decline your offensive suggestion.