Gail Collins appears less than impressed with John Edwards' intellectual honesty:

John Edwards has a plan to cap carbon emissions, while allowing businesses to buy the right to go over their quotas. Many people regard this as the most efficient and politically salable way to reduce greenhouse gases. But they usually acknowledge that it would make some products - like small orange fruits that have to be transported a long way to get to market - more expensive.

"I live in North Carolina; I'll probably never eat a tangerine again," Elizabeth said.

To be utterly honest, the first reaction to this on the part of many listeners was that the Edwards family could afford to continue eating tangerines even if they became more costly than a two-family house in Des Moines. But we digress.

Was Mr. Edwards prepared to admit that the public might have to give up tangerines in order to keep the polar bears from drowning in the Arctic?

"I'd have to think about it," he said during a press conference later that day. This was actually his second answer, the first being a short, utterly unrelated disquisition on food safety inspections. The Edwards campaign has devoted immense effort to beating back the image of their candidate as The Man With the Expensive Haircut. They don't want to make August the month for The Man Who Would Take Away America's Citrus Fruit.

Edwards eventually told Collins that his plan to curb global warming would have a "cost impact. No question about it," but then his press shop ruined the "candid" moment by calling back to clarify:

Yesterday morning, a spokesman for the Edwards campaign called to clarify his position. The global warming program would not require families to pay more for everyday products, he said. "We are optimistic we will not have to raise the price of tangerines."