It seems campy to say, “Only in Hollywood,” but CNN suggested Friday that Al Gore might announce his candidacy for president at the Academy Awards on Sunday.
During the 4PM EST installment of “The Situation Room,” Bill Schneider perfectly set up the ideal liberal fantasy (somewhat similar video available here):
It's Academy Awards night. Best documentary feature is up. And the Oscar is favored to go to "An Inconvenient Truth," starring Al Gore… Lawrence Bender and the film's other producers come up to accept the Oscar with Gore. The audience roars its approval. This is liberal Hollywood. Gore speaks.
The video then cut to Martin Kaplan, who is the director of the Norman Lear Center:
A Trenton, New Jersey, meteorologist has just launched a new website to counter the constant stream of disinformation about anthropogenic global warming coming from a hysterical media.
As reported by ClimatePolice.com (emphasis mine throughout):
Joseph Conklin, a meteorologist with expertise in the analysis of surface weather observations, has launched a website to help promote alternative scientific views on climate change. He believes these views have been overshadowed and even wrongly criticized by sensationalist news stories.
The press release continued:
If what Fox News reported Saturday is correct, conservatives all around the country might have been given a very early Christmas present by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.
FNC’s Bill McCuddy announced the following from Hollywood during Saturday’s "Fox & Friends”:
The big story here out on the red carpet back to live action is that Mr., Mr. Al Gore who is going to walk this red carpet, still doesn’t have permission to go up to that podium if he in fact wins for “An Inconvenient Truth,” which sounds awfully inconvenient in and of itself. It’s something of a clerical error. This guy can not win or give an acceptance speech to save his life.
How delicious. McCuddy was asked to elaborate why that might be:
As sickening as it might seem, Al Gore appears to be a lock to win an Academy Award Sunday for his schlockumentary about global warming. Unfortunately, the real inconvenient truth is that the film appears to violate the Academy’s own rules concerning documentaries.
As reported by CNSNews Thursday:
According to the "rule 12" standard for documentary films established by the Academy, while it is permissible to employ storytelling devices such as re-enactments, stock footage, stills and animations, the emphasis must be on fact and not fiction.
The critics argue that in the case of "An Inconvenient Truth," the criteria are not met.
Here are some of the specifics:
This is getting ridiculous. For the second time in roughly two weeks, a governor had harsh criticism for a state climatologist over differing views of man’s responsibility for global warming.
Gov. Ruth Ann Minner has directed Delaware's state climatologist to stop using his title in public statements on climate change, citing a clash of views on global warming and confusion over the position's ties to the administration.
Minner, who made the directive in a letter, described the move as a way to "clarify" the role of David R. Legates, a prominent skeptic of views that human activities are warming the planet and triggering climate shifts.
In this instance, the governor in question was concerned about the state climatologist’s work when he wasn’t representing her state. However, it suggests that Minner’s views have been impacted by all the recent focus on this issue by the media:
Just how large an effect has all this global warming media hysteria had? Well, in Sydney, Australia, there is a company selling carbon credits for folks that want to offset their cat’s flatulence. They’ll do the same for your grandmother, too.
Think I’m kidding? As reported Thursday by Bloomberg (emphasis mine throughout):
Governments in rich nations are spending billions of dollars to buy a clearer conscience over climate change. Are they getting their money's worth? Enlightened individuals, those who stay awake at nights wondering what they can do to prevent the polar caps from melting, at least have a growing menu of choices.
To put this in some perspective, a NewsBusters article on Wednesday made the point that all this global warming alarmism is about money. Folks, you have no idea:
This one is too good, folks, and requires all liquids, combustibles, and sharp objects to be safely stowed. Everybody ready? Good.
An article in Thursday’s Toronto Star deliciously began (emphasis mine throughout): “Is Al Gore bad for your mental health?”
I’m sure that question is a simple one for most conservatives. However, this issue appears more complex – and hysterical – for Canadians:
The message of environmental destruction being delivered by Gore – and a host of others in recent months – is proving too much to handle for some who feel helpless controlling the forces of nature.
That's only the beginning, folks. This gets much better:
One of the primary solutions for climate change being touted by global warming alarmists is the purchase and sale of carbon credits. Put simply, companies, countries, and individuals could balance their CO2 output by purchasing credits from others that are emitting less greenhouse gases than prescribed maximums.
The concept is that this would give companies, countries, and individuals a financial incentive to produce less CO2. Readers might recall that during a debate on “Hannity’s America” this past Sunday evening, the two liberal guests firmly avowed that there wasn’t anything wrong with Al Gore’s use of private planes because he was offsetting his massive emission of CO2 with purchases of carbon credits.
Unfortunately, there’s a hitch in this scheme that threatens to totally derail it: carbon prices are plummeting due to an excess supply. I realize this might be a bit complex, but an article published in Green Business News wonderfully detailed the problems inherent in this scheme (emphasis mine throughout):
So, you think the global warming alarmists are actually concerned about the environment or the future of the planet? Think again, for a recent funds request from the World Bank to solve this “problem” should clue you in as to what is really going on with those advancing theories emanating from junk science.
As reported by Reuters (emphasis mine throughout): “The World Bank wants to breathe life back into a mooted $10 billion-plus fund to combat climate change which would need public and private sector backing, its Chief Scientist Robert Watson told Reuters on Tuesday.”
What’s the money needed for, you ask:
Got a problem you can’t solve? A flu bug you can’t kick? Financial woes? Unfulfilling love life?
Forget about seeing a doctor, psychiatrist, or financial consultant. After all, your problems could all be linked to global warming!
Such seems certainly the case in Japan and France where a recent rise in head lice and hornets respectively have actually been tied to the planetary ailment being studied by soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore.
I kid you not.
As reported by the Mainichi Daily News (emphasis mine throughout):
Many conservatives are familiar with a marvelous book by Peter Schweizer entitled “Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy.” In it, Schweizer detailed how America’s top liberals are famous for not practicing what they preach.
On Sunday’s “Hannity’s America,” the host demonstrated how the country’s leading global warming alarmist, Dr. Al Gore, is a perfect example of a liberal who doesn’t come close to following the lofty environmental ideals he demands of the rest of us (video available here).
At issue was the inherent absurdity of a self-righteous politician complaining about the dangers of greenhouse gases while he flies fly around the world in private airplanes: