Let's remember what Ronald Suskin wrote:
In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''
Today, from the realm of the folks who (used to) think they can create their new reality are now trying to will-away the reality of the problems in Iraq. This came a head largely because NBC largely said "Screw the euphemisms, this is a civil war."
Today's analysis in the Post tries to argue that this semantic point is actually important. It's not really, and in fact some of the reasons to fight the US news media on this are bizarre -- such that a graphic on MSNBC could cause Iraqis to take sides, which is particularly interesting since they haven't really solved the electricity problem in Iraq, much less the cable-TV issue there.
It's almost surreal. We seem to have a war being run by advertising executives.