NationStates Jolt Archive

"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.'' "

This is about a chat a reporter had with one of Bush's aides. It essentially says that Bush is anti-reality. If you would want someone like that, I suggest you sue the hospital for giving you that frontal lobotomy when you were a baby, 'cause you're wrong. Reality>random ideas

"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.'' "

This is about a chat a reporter had with one of Bush's aides. It essentially says that Bush is anti-reality. If you would want someone like that, I suggest you sue the hospital for giving you that frontal lobotomy when you were a baby, 'cause you're wrong. Reality>random ideas
Some references would be nice, particularly non-biased ones.

You can find the interview in the NY Times magazine. Before you start complaining that it's an uber-liberal thing, what I posted directly quotes what Bush's aide said. If the reporter was changing the words of the quote, which is unlikely seeing the quote was from a published article that can be viewed by a very large amount of people, then prove it and prosecute them.

what you needed to do was say upfront where the quote came from, who did the quoting and perhaps a bit more of the context around it so it makes more sense when reading it cold

isnt the NYT magazine a pay for site on the net? if we cant just "look it up" we need more to go on.

did it say who the aide was? its a creepy quote isnt it?

Yeah. I read the whole article. It's pretty creepy if you think that the person in charge needs to actually know stuff. On the other hand, if you think the person in charge only needs to be in touch with the will of God, you'll find the article most encouraging.