If you think John Edwards can't be trusted because he was a glorified ambulance chaser who perverted the rules of the game to make his millions, check out this.
On the other hand, the claim itself might require you forget the rules bending activities of the current President and Vice President in their business lives. Or, the questionable activities of any number of people in the administration and surrounding it. For instance, recall Katherine Harris? She not only was clearly biased toward one side (itself patently corrupt), but the person in charge of keeping elections honest herself had problems when she ran for office. And, now her title is Rep. Harris -- she was later elected to Congress, and made a deputy whip. I know, get over it.
Anyway, this week is the Democratic Convention. I'm not too excited about the whole thing, nor is the media per se -- the major networks have only limited coverage. This is unfortunate, but it is a result of years of the convention not being much more than an extended political advertisement. Also, it bears noting that various resources are available for continual and extended coverage, including blogs, cable news, talk radio, and C-SPAN. I myself get my news from these sources more often than I get them from network news, and the majority of the population also has access to them. Along with print media, which also covers the conventions, it isn't as bad as it might seem at first.
"Conventions" per se tend not to be for outside involvement. For instance, a convention of funeral directors do not care that much if the public or media aren't involved too much, if at all. And, political conventions to some degree follow the same criteria. The Democratic Party itself is in various ways so disorganized as an individual entity that a time for its parts to come together (convene) for a particular purpose, such as starting a presidential campaign, is a good thing.
Still, political parties uniquely have a public dimension. After all, ultimately the public has to vote for these people. And, conventions can serve as a time to specifically involve the public as well. More media coverage, including prime time events to address various issues, and introduce not only the ticket itself but other members of the party (e.g. Barack Obama, the assumed winner of the open Illinois seat in the Senate), would be a good thing. Not everyone constantly concerns themselves about such matters -- the convention serves as a special couple days, days when nothing much is on television anyway, when the public can be informed and take part. I think grass roots is essential for the future of the party.
Anyway, one more time -- why Boston? The party has to prepare for a new generation, and having a convention in prime Democratic territory is rather stupid actually. I do not relish my city (NYC) being invaded by the Republicans in a few weeks, but the choice makes a lot of sense. Why not Ohio or some other key swing state? Oh well.