Why must liberals consistently overdo Al Gore's resume and insist he won an Oscar for An Inconvenient Truth? The award went to Davis Guggenheim, the director. Yes, he starred in a Best Documentary. But calling Gore an Oscar winner is a bit like claiming Charlie Sheen won an Oscar for Platoon. But at The Huffington Post, Brent Budowsky was talking up Keith Olbermann's new show on Al Gore's Current TV. Budowsky kept reminding the reader of how he inflated Gore's resume beyond reality:
Now, here come Al Gore, one of the preeminent statesmen of our times, recipient of both the Nobel Peace Prize and the Academy Award, among many other well deserved honors....
This is the first time in the history of news when corporate ownership of news will reside in the hands of a statesmen and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize and Academy Award....
I am not sure whether Gore thinks about this, or cares about this, but we will soon learn what happens to cable news when the ownership is not interested in promoting the reality show of a bigot, or becoming an appendage of the Republican party, but rests in the hands of a Nobel Laureate and Academy Award recipient....
Will ownership by a Nobel Laureate raise both the quality and commercial clout of cable news? Or will the cable news freak show just continue with one new entrant into a playing field that most Americans do not trust, or watch?
Naturally Budowsky thinks Olbermann resembles Edward R. Murrow in his journalistic integrity (I'd agree, but both live up to the liberal hack tradition). He began by asking "If Joe McCarthy had a reality television show on NBC, I wonder if NBC would have promoted McCarthy then the same way it promotes Donald Trump and his campaign for birthers and bigots now?"
