Katie Couric's interview of the Edwards last night on 60 minutes was disturbing. Not because of Couric's less-than-compelling interview style, and certainly not because of the Edward's performance, but because I immediately recognized what they said as the lie that everyone tells themselves when faced with this situation.

Lie is an accurate word in this case, but it shouldn't be taken in the context of a politician's cynical attempt to manipulate his audience--I have absolutely no doubt that the Edwards sincerely believe what they are saying.

Elizabeth Edwards justified the continuation of the campaign as a matter of "living" her life fully, but in my personal experience, and from what I've observed in far too many others who have faced similar prospects, when the understanding of one's imminent death passes from the abstract to the real, all considerations drop to the ground except one--the relationships with your loved ones.

Clearly the Edwards aren't there yet, but when they get there, John Edwards will no longer be a candidate.

Aside from this, what struck me about the interview was how badly Couric conducted it. I would have expected a transcendent moment from her, having lived through the death of her own husband from colon cancer. She should have had a feel for this interview that almost no one in the news business could have matched. What we got were a series of "impersonal questions"--"Some say that you are..."

That is a weasel approach to asking difficult questions. Reporters use this tactic for a variety of reasons: to get politicians to respond on the record to mere rumors and to avoid appearing unsympathetic and insensitive. Its a gimmick, and a much overused and ineffective one at that. Couric had the standing, because of her own experience, to ask poignant and effective questions in a far more personal way.

Her performance was more than a disappointment--it was a clear indication that she is out of her league.