I’m betting that if Edwards wins they will just gloss over the win and talk about the percentage difference between Hillary and Obama. Call me jaded.

A young fella aspired to be a fiction writer, but had to settle for writing copy in a newspaper. The older wiser journalist told him he’d get plenty of experience writing fiction.

The press can write fiction at least as well as official fiction writers and they can make people focus on nonsense while ignoring much more important stories.

Mr. Klynn and I had a long talk about the candidates. We started to make our pro-con list. Edwards ended looking the best. Then our conversation centered on the fact that Elizabeth is another key to Edwards topping our list. Of any candidate, she lends a purity and legitimacy to her efforts for trying to make the world and our country better for her children and husband. She is fighting the fight of and for her life. So, her husband’s visions for leading this country match her strong focus on issues. She is not looking at a power grab, she is looking for a better day, a better life for her family.

When a close friend of ours with five children was dying of cancer, she focused all of her energy on making changes that would be for the good of her family after she was gone. The “profoundness” of time and using the time to the best of her family and bring changes for the good of her family was an immense event to witness personally. Her reach in making changes touched a whole community and not just her family. We see many similarities in Elizabeth’s efforts in her husbands campaign. Elizabeth is stronger now, because her vision is sharp and focused. What a great gift for John to have her standing next to him.

Here’s just a few…

COHEN (8/11/05): The same holds for the other women associated with this [New York Senate] race—even more so if Hillary Clinton eventually runs for president. In effect, she will once again invite us to dissect her marriage and why she stays in it. She is clearly up to it—but why she is up to it is something many of us will never understand. The life of a politician, ever strange, is getting stranger and stranger.

COHEN (2/13/07): It was about the only thing I got right about the war, which, the record will show, I supported. If I were running for the presidency, I might call my position “a mistake” and bray about being misled. But it was really a lapse in judgment. For reasons extraneous to this particular column, I thought the war would do wonders for the Middle East and that it would last, at the most, a week or two. In this I was assured by the usual experts in and out of government. My head nodded like one of those little toy dogs in the window of the car ahead of you.

So I do not condemn Clinton and other Democratic presidential candidates — Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and John Edwards — for voting for the war because I would have done the same. I fault them, though, for passing the blame to Bush as the guy who misled them. They all had sufficient knowledge to question the administration’s arguments, and they did not do so. Not a single one of them, for instance, could possibly have believed the entirety of the administration’s case or not have suspected that the reasons for war were being hyped.

COHEN (9/18/07): This week Hillary Clinton announced her health care plan. Good for her. But you never had any doubt, did you, that she was going to have one — and a plan for everything else. The issue with Hillary Clinton is not whether she’s smart or experienced but whether she has — how do we say this? — the character to be president. Behind her, after all, trails the lingering vapor of all those gates: Travel, File, Whitewater, and other scandals to which she was a part only through marriage. In a hatless society, she is always wearing a question mark.

Let’s not rush to conclusions about who’s fingerprints are on these hit pieces, ok?