Al Gore wasn't even given time to bask in the glory of An Inconvenient Truth's Oscar victory. Just one day after the Academy Awards were aired, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research released a shining example of how investigative reporting can be applied to smear campaigning.

The center, a group that advocates for conservative economic policies, pulled the Gore family's electric bills for a year and found that the Gores have an average monthly electric bill of $1,200.

Gore's staff, however, notes that he "purchases enough 'green power' — renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and methane gas — to balance 100 percent of his electricity costs," according to the Associated Press.

Gore purchases 108 blocks of green power each month at the cost of $4 a block to offset his personal carbon emissions, according to the article.

In this case, it appears that Gore has managed to find a balance between his ideals and a comfortable lifestyle. The situation would be different if, for example, Gore did in fact have a $1,200 energy bill and did nothing to erase his environmental impact.

The dirty trick of it all is that while the center attempts to discredit the former vice president, it is taking this opportunity to expound upon how the issue of human-caused climate change is still up in the air.

This one-two punch of distraction and misinformation does absolutely nothing to further an intelligent conversation about global warming. In fact, it does the opposite by reducing serious science to petty political posturing.

If the Tennessee Center for Policy Research wants to call Gore a hypocrite, that's fine. But if it wants to join the realm of academic debate, then playing the politics game needs to be halted immediately. Gore's personal energy use becomes beside the point as educated minds consider hard climate data.

In a time when smear-campaigning is only expected to get worse as the 2008 presidential election nears, now is the moment to rise above bickering, not stoop to a new low.