|
Banned
|
Michael Crichton's "small penis/child rapist Revenge Against Critic of his Politics
Back in march, TNR columnist wrote this article:
Quote:
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20060320&s=crowley032006
<b>MICHAEL CRICHTON'S SCARIEST CREATION.
Jurassic President</b>
by Michael Crowley 1 | 2
Post date 03.09.06 | Issue date 03.20.06
<i>She took a sip of red wine, then set the glass down on the bedside table. Unceremoniously, she pulled her top over her head and dropped her skirt. She was wearing nothing beneath.
Still in her high heels, she walked toward him. ... She was so passionate she seemed almost angry, and her beauty, the physical perfection of her dark body, intimidated him, but not for long.
--State of Fear by Michael Crichton </i>
It may be hard to fathom that someone capable of writing the above passage is also capable of discovering the hidden truth about global warming that has eluded the world's leading scientists. But Michael Crichton, on the phone from Los Angeles, does not sound daunted. "If you just look at the science, I, at least, am underwhelmed," he says in a slightly jaded monotone that belies his breathless potboiler prose. "This may or may not be a problem, but it is far from the most serious problem. If you want to do something, [limiting emissions] is not what to do. We don't at this moment have good technology to do this, if, in fact, it's necessary to do it."
Then, before I can stop him, the superstar creator of Jurassic Park and more than a dozen other best-selling novels, as well as several box-office movie smashes and television's blockbuster "ER," is off and running through his favorite new area of expertise. Effortlessly, Crichton touches on the anti-windmill movement in England, references a 2001 article in the journal Science on global energy needs, notes interesting developments regarding the Kyoto treaty, and poses a question about the latest round of nation-by-nation emissions data. "How many people know that we did better on a percentage basis than Canada?" Crichton asks. He certainly does.
Global warming--or, specifically, the massive hoax by scientists and environmentalists that it allegedly represents and the resulting sexual conquests of nubile women that inevitably flow from the uncovering of this conspiracy--is the topic of State of Fear, Crichton's latest best-seller. So Crichton's ravings on the subject might be excusable as just a bad case of authorial self-promotion--were it not for the fact that he can now count among his millions of readers the president of the United States. As reported in Rebel-in-Chief, a new book on George W. Bush by Weekly Standard Editor Fred Barnes, soon after State of Fear's December 2004 publication, Crichton was contacted by Karl Rove with word that Bush had read his novel and wanted to meet him. In January 2005, Crichton spent an hour with Bush. The session, Barnes writes, found the men "in near-total agreement."
Crichton, who hasn't previously spoken on the record about his meeting with Bush, bridles when I mention it. It's superficial, he says, beside the point, and soon he has slipped back into the more comfortable topic of U.N. documents on atmospheric temperature. What little he will offer about Bush isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. "In terms of meeting with Bush, I would say that, if the president of the United States asks to meet you, you go. Period," he says.
Crichton has obvious commercial reasons to downplay any hint that he might be a Bush partisan (Democrats buy books, too, after all). But the pulp novelist's influence on the president is even greater than Crichton's harshest critics imagine. During his career, Crichton has relentlessly propagandized on behalf of one big idea: that experts--scientists, intellectuals, reporters, and bureaucrats--are spectacularly corrupt and spectacularly wrong. (Not a terribly surprising response from a writer consistently patronized by critics.) Crichton's oeuvre has promoted, for an audience of millions, a damning critique of expertise. And the Bush administration has put this critique into action, trampling the opinions of government scientists, exorcising trained economists, muzzling the press, and stifling State Department wonks. Crichton, in other words, primed America for the Bush era......
|
in his new novel, "Next", Chrichton paid Crowley back....with the perverted, sophomoric attack described here....banking on the premise that a man accused of being endowed with a small penis, will remain silent when that description of him is included in an attack:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/bo...html?ref=books
December 14, 2006
Columnist Accuses Crichton of ‘Literary Hit-and-Run’
By FELICIA R. LEE
“Next,” Michael Crichton’s new novel about the perils of biotechnology, has not proved as polarizing as his previous thriller, “State of Fear,” which dismisses global warming. But one of the new book’s minor characters — Mick Crowley, a Washington political columnist who rapes a baby — may be a literary dagger aimed at Michael Crowley, a Washington political reporter who wrote an unflattering article about Mr. Crichton this year.
Certainly Mr. Crowley thinks so.
In a “Washington Diarist” feature that was to be posted last night on The New Republic’s Web site, tnr.com, and published in the magazine’s Dec. 25 issue, Mr. Crowley says he is the victim of “a literary hit-and-run” because of a 3,700-word article in The New Republic in March.
In that article he accused Mr. Crichton of being “a menacing figure” because he uses his “potboiler prose” to advance causes now dear to Republicans. Mr. Crowley is a senior editor at The New Republic and writes primarily about politics.
“In lieu of a letter to the editor, Crichton had fictionalized me as a child rapist,” Mr. Crowley writes.
Mr. Crichton could not be reached yesterday for comment, and a publicist at his publisher, HarperCollins, did not return calls.
The March article that Mr. Crowley referred to concluded: “And now, like a mighty t-rex that has escaped from Jurassic Park, Crichton stomps across the public policy landscape, finally claiming the influence that he has always sought. In this sense, he himself is like an experiment gone wrong — a creation of the publishing industry and Hollywood who has unexpectedly mutated into a menacing figure haunting think tanks, policy forums, hearing rooms and even the Oval Office.”
Mr. Crowley, 34, reached by telephone yesterday before the article was posted on the Web site, declined to expand on what he wrote. “I want to let the piece speak for itself,” he said.
The character that Mr. Crowley says he believes is modeled on him mostly appears on two pages in Mr. Crichton’s 431-page novel.
On Page 227 Mr. Crichton writes: “Alex Burnet was in the middle of the most difficult trial of her career, a rape case involving the sexual assault of a two-year-old boy in Malibu. The defendant, thirty-year-old Mick Crowley, was a Washington-based political columnist who was visiting his sister-in-law when he experienced an overwhelming urge to have anal sex with her young son, still in diapers.”
<b>Mick Crowley is described as a “wealthy, spoiled Yale graduate” with a small penis that nonetheless “caused significant tears to the toddler’s rectum.”
Mr. Crowley writes that Mr. Crichton’s Mick Crowley not only has a similar name but is also a graduate of Yale and a Washington political journalist. Mr. Crowley contends that Mr. Crichton has tried to escape public censure for his literary attack by hiding behind what has become known as “the small penis rule.”</b>
The rule, Mr. Crowley writes, is described in a 1998 article in The New York Times in which the libel lawyer Leon Friedman said it is a trick used by authors who have defamed someone to discourage lawsuits. “No male is going to come forward and say, ‘That character with a very small penis — that’s me!’ ” Mr. Friedman explained.
Although he writes that no one seems to have drawn the connection between Mick Crowley and Michael Crowley, Mr. Crowley concludes that he is “strangely flattered” by his 15 minutes of fame in Mr. Crichton’s novel.
“To explain why, let me propose a corollary to the small penis rule,” he writes. “Call it the small man rule: If someone offers substantive criticism of an author and the author responds by hitting below the belt, as it were, then he’s conceding that the critic has won.”
|
from Sen. James Inhofe's senate website:
Quote:
http://inhofe.senate.gov/pressreleas...mateupdate.htm
Climate Change Update
Senate Floor Statement by
U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe(R-Okla)
January 4, 2005
......In addition, last month, popular author Dr. Michael Crichton, who has questioned the wisdom of those who trumpet a "scientific consensus," released a new book called "State of Fear," which is premised on the global warming debate. I'm happy to report that Dr. Crichton's new book reached #3 on the New York Times bestseller list.
I highly recommend the book to all of my colleagues. Dr. Crichton, a medical doctor and scientist, very cleverly weaves a compelling presentation of the scientific facts of climate change-with ample footnotes and documentation throughout-into a gripping plot. From what I can gather, Dr. Crichton's book is designed to bring some sanity to the global warming debate. In the "Author's Message" at the end of the book, he refreshingly states what scientists have suspected for years: "We are also in the midst of a natural warming trend that began about 1850, as we emerged from a 400 year cold spell known as the Little Ice Age." Dr. Crichton states that, "Nobody knows how much of the present warming trend might be a natural phenomenon," and, "Nobody knows how much of the present trend might be man-made." And for those who see impending disaster in the coming century, Dr. Crichton urges calm: "I suspect that people of 2100 will be much richer than we are, consume more energy, have a smaller global population, and enjoy more wilderness than we have today. I don't think we have to worry about them."
For those who do worry, or induce such worry in others, "State of Fear" has a very simple message: stop worrying and stop spreading fear. Throughout the book, "fictional" environmental organizations are more focused on raising money, principally by scaring potential contributors with bogus scientific claims and predictions of a global apocalypse, than with "saving the environment." Here we have, as the saying goes, art imitating life.
As my colleagues will remember from a floor speech I gave last year, this is part and parcel of what these organizations peddle to the general public. Their fear mongering knows no bounds. Just consider the debate over mercury emissions. President Bush proposed the first-ever cap to reduce mercury emissions from power plants by 70 percent. True to form, these groups said he was allowing more mercury into the air. Go figure........
|
My last thread deals with the idea that overeaction to perceived liberal bias in news reporting, and to the "terrorist threat" against the US, has resulted in the creation of a "parallel" news reporting universe that is extremely partisan, and disturbingly, influences too many to accept the fear mongering that is the GWOT, even as it trots out petty "shills", like Crichton, to back the anti-science, industry funded message that global warming is "fear mongering". Meanwhile, the results of the greatest institutionally authored fear mongering OP in our time, the GWOT, rages on.....
....the health of Sen. Tim Johnson could determine whether Inhofe and Crichton get to continue their bullshit....further setting back the day that the US commits to reductions in fossil fuel emissions, don't these guys have much of what we should be doing, upside down? No to global warming, yes to GWOT? |