The Democratic state party chair in Michigan says the Barack Obama campaign has rejected the idea of a "firehouse primary." The proposal would have included:

Polls would be open from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., and any eligible voter who hadn't voted in the state's Jan. 15 Republican primary could participate. The voter must be a citizen who turns 18 by the November election and declares himself or herself a Democrat for the day.

On Obama's rejection:

Obama's campaign doesn't like the idea, said Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer. "That's what I've been told by his campaign, but it's not my place to inquire about motivations," said Brewer, who said he thinks a do-over primary has serious financial and logistical problems.

Update [2008-3-8 11:48:12 by Big Tent Democrat]: Just as significant is the fact that Carville announces that Clinton camp will raise 15MM for new primaries and challenges Obama camp to do same:

By Big Tent Democrat

Nah. But first what he said and why it does not mean he will not be a VP candidate. From ABC:

Q: Could you ever see yourself on the same ticket as Senator Clinton?

A: Well, you know, I think it’s premature. You won’t see me as a vice presidential candidate -- you know, I’m running for president. . . [W]hat I’m really focused on right now, because all that stuff is premature, is winning this nomination and changing the country. . . .

What is Obama doing here? Pushing back on Hillary Clinton's broad hints that she will pick Obama as her VP. Why is Clinton doing that? To give the impression you can get Obama and still vote for her. That is aimed not only at voters but, and I think much more importantly, also at Super Delegates. Obama needs to push back against this idea as it hurts him in his pursuit of the nomination. This has a danger for Obama though, it might make it seem he cares more about himself than the Democratic Party.

I am fine with what he is doing, but he needs a more ambiguous answer. Suggestion for Obama - "I do not see myself running for VP."

Update [2008-3-8 11:38:20 by Big Tent Democrat]:Media does not bite:

By Big Tent Democrat

Because most of the Left blogs are too busy bemoaning the fact that Samantha Power had to leave the Obama campaign for making, to them, the not unreasonable statement that Hillary Clinton is a monster (no they have not gone off the deep end have they?), you are not likely to see much reporting on the fact that Canada Only Got A NAFTA Briefing From An Obama Advisor:

[Canadian] PMO: Officials only got briefing from Obama campaign

OTTAWA — Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton never gave Canada any secret assurances about the future of NAFTA such as those allegedly offered by Barack Obama's campaign, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office said Friday.

. . . After being asked whether Canadian officials asked for — or received — any briefings from a Clinton campaign representative outlining her plans on NAFTA, a spokeswoman for the prime minister offered a response Friday.

"The answer is no, they did not," said Harper spokeswoman Sandra Buckler.

After a few days of great interest, conspiracy theories and excitement, most Left blogs have to remember to forget this story again. It hurts Obama again, so it must be forgotten.

By Big Tent Democrat

"I just have to mention this because I don't want anybody here to be confused," Mr. Obama said. "I was opposed to this war in 2002. If it had been up to me we would have never been in this war. It was because of George Bush with an assist from Hillary Clinton and John McCain that we entered into this war." Under Mr. Obama's rules, the attack does not violate his pledge to wage a new type of politics because it revolves around a specific issue, like Iraq.

NYTimes

I want to be clear on this - I understand that pols have to engage in "negative" attacks. Because they work. Pols do what they do. But I can not stand the false conceit that any pol, including Obama, is going to usher in an era of "new politics." They can't. He can't. He is just mendacious about this. Heck, how about this from the same article: [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

Jay Cost of Real Clear Politics has a learned piece on what is wrong with the Democratic nomination system. It provides a strong basis for questioning the new CW that the pledged delegate lead is the designed be all and end all for choosing the nominee. My earlier take is here. As for Cost's piece, I will skip the social science, and get to what I deem the heart of the argument:

The problem for the Democrats might seem small at first. Obama has won about 53% of the delegates, and about 51% of the popular vote. That is a pretty small difference. The problem is that the difference is systemic. The nominating system seems to contain several biases that favor Obama.

. . . Voters in larger states are not as well represented as voters in smaller states. Thus, the states form a band that move from the bottom-left to the top-right. Look carefully at it, and you'll notice a curiosity. States at the top of the band are almost always strong Kerry states, while the states at the bottom are almost always strong Bush states. This implies that Bush states are better represented at the convention than Kerry states, independent of population.

MORE . . .

With eyes on Wyoming -- Cheney country -- tomorrow, this seemed appropriate. Especially since "Unqualified support for the 2nd Amendment is the second item" of the Wyoming Democratic party's platform.

Wyoming caucuses convene tomorrow morning. 12 delegates are at stake. Hillary, Bill, Chelsea and Barack Obama all have campaigned there this week, with Hillary and Obama each making two appearances today.

Denver's Rocky Mountain News had reporters live-blogging the appearances all day and evening.

They drew large crowds and while Obama is expected to win the caucus vote, Hillary should make a decent showing.

One joke Obama didn't tell today: the one about Cheney being his cousin. A story about Hillary that did come out through one of those introducing her: Hillary has eaten reindeer.

Wyoming is pure Cheney country. The chances of the Dems taking it in November are nil. But, it's exciting to see both Hillary, Obama, Bill and Chelsea in western mode.

Update: The reindeer story below:

Sen. Barack Obama likes to say he intends to rely on the people around him in making presidential decisions.

We've seen how that would play out with Samantha Power. Now there's John Brennan, one of his advisers on intelligence and foreign policy.

Think Progress reports:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has consistently spoken out and voted against granting retroactive immunity for telecoms that participated with the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. This stance was part of the reason he won the support of Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), a leader on civil liberties issues.

One of Obama’s advisers on intelligence and foreign policy advisers, however, is someone who “strongly” supports telecomm immunity.

What Brennan told the National Journal is below the fold:

Everyone knows Cindy McCain, the heiress wife of John McCain, was addicted to pain pills. CNN's 360 tonight highlighted it in a profile of her tonight.

But Cindy McCain wasn't just addicted to pain pills. She was investigated federally for stealing pain pills from a medical charity she headed and for having prescriptions filled in the names of the charity's employees. She admitted it. One of the doctors who wrote the prescriptions for her lost his license.

Mrs. McCain, through her lawyers, was able to get federal prosecutors to let her enter a diversion program and avoid jail.

Diversion is common in state courts for first-time offenders. It isn't in federal courts.

Here are some articles from that time period:

• Opiate for the Mrs
• How Cindy McCain was outed for drug addiction

John McCain is a hawk in the war on drugs. One standard for his wife, another for everyone else.

His voting record on drugs, after his wife's problems:

More....

Newsweek reports:

A plan to raise soft money to pay for a second Florida Democratic primary--this one by mail--seems close to approval, according to Sen. Bill Nelson.

I hope it fails and the Florida delegates from the Jan. 29 vote are seated. Big Tent Democrat favors a revote.

We've all weighed in on this numerous times, but once more won't hurt.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

I am a free trader and a NAFTA booster. I think both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were and are demagoguing on NAFTA and agree with me mostly on trade. Ezra Klein, at least as to Obama, agrees with me:

But Austan Goolsbee isn't Barack Obama's adviser by accident, or because Obama never noticed he violently disagrees with Goolsbee's economic outlook. Goolsbee is his adviser because...Barack Obama doesn't really agree with what Barack Obama is saying about "NAFTA, China trade and a host of related issues." . . . Barack Obama is much more worried about trade when trying to get votes in Ohio.

Yep. Pols are pols. They do what they do.

By Big Tent Democrat

What Tristero said, mostly:

I'll say it only once. I don't have a favorite between Obama and Clinton. They are both excellent [NOTE: I do not think either is even a particularly good political candidate but both will be good Presidents, but I think Obama is more electable] candidates (which is not to say I'm necessarily in favor of a joint ticket). Neither are manufactured manly-men-with-their- straight-shooters-shooting-straight-at -you-can-you-take-it. By comparison with St. John - all image to obscure his consistent behavior as a rightwing operative - both Obama and Clinton invite critical examination (please read the first clause of this sentence before ranting about Candidate X's deviousness and willingness to hide his/her true agenda/earnings/actions). So I think it not surprising, nor terribly important, that I find it easy to support them both while at the same time often disagreeing with the particulars of their platforms. The point is that even when I think they are wrong, I recognize they are both serious people, not clowns who want to inherit the dubious mantle of George W. Bush's codpiece.