Perhaps the most brutal reaction to a convention that I've noticed (and I hadn't even begun to gestate in 1968) was the press' uniform treatment of the 1992 Republican National Convention. The press treated the Republicans as dour, doctrinaire, insular, narrow-minded, elitist, separatist and generally disdainful of non-Republicans. The press especially noted the gloomy and admittedly ugly speech by (paleocon) commentator Pat Buchanan and elided any discussion of the excellent speech that President Reagan gave in his last major public appearance.
Today, the 2004 Democratic convention is a parallel of the 1992 Republican convention. The Democratic delegates are doctrinaire, elitist, disdainful of non-Democrats, and showering a wartime president with denunciations based on Democrats' lies, misrepresentations, half-truths and willful distortions of reality. This rundown doesn't even mention the libels (Al Sharpton calling Pres. Bush -- the only president with more than one black in his Cabinet -- a segregationist; Theresa Kerrry calling Republicans unpatriotic, the whole BUSH LIED line of attack that is now proven completely false).
Moreover, the Democrats, as usual, seem to have forgotten that 9-11 happened (listen to their hagiographical memories of the Clinton economy and denunciations of Bush's economy that completely ignore how extraordinarily fast the economy rebounded after 9-11), that Saddam was a mass murderer and terrorist-aider and that there is a danger to this country that is far greater than whether deranged redneck MPs failed to adhere to the Geneva Conventions in treating Abu Ghraib prisoners and whether we've squandered such irrelevancies as the amity of the French and Germans.
Just don't expect the press to ever question the Democrats' talking points.
Joined the Beltway Traffic Jam.