Magic tricks

Decades ago, while far from home, I found myself seated next to a magician -- a talkative magician.  Like most modern-day magicians, he did not claim any actual magical powers.  He was an entertainer, a performer who made a living by doing things that APPEARED to be magic -- that appeared to defy a logical explanation.  Things like making an object appear to be broken, and then whole again, or making objects seem to vanish and reappear.  (As I recall, this particular magician liked to work with doves, making them vanish and then re-materialize.)

While my new friend was reluctant to give away the particular secrets behind HIS tricks, he enthusiastically gave away the secrets behind OTHER magician's tricks.  As a general rule, he explained that magic was heavily dependent on distraction and misdirection.  The observer must be made to focus on something other than what was important, at least momentarily.  If the magician needed to do something important with his left hand, he needed to direct the observer's attention to his right hand.  If something crucial was about to happen in the center of the stage, the observer needed to be paying attention to the sides of the stage.  The magician explained that, if done well, this was almost impossible for the observer to overcome.  When he himself was watching another magician, and KNEW precisely where the important thing was about to happen, his attention was STILL successfully diverted from that spot, at least for the crucial moment it took for the other magician to appear to do something "magical".

This seems to be precisely the method that President Obama's campaign is using in an attempt to win his re-election:  Keep the observers' attention focussed on unimportant areas, at least at crucial moments.  Rather than honestly discussing the differences between President Obama and Mitt Romney, or discussing President Obama's accomplishments and future goals, the Obama campaign has successfully directed attention to things like Mitt Romney's wealth, or his tax returns, or at one point to some unfortunate absurd comments made by a Senatorial candidate -- comments having nothing to do with the Presidential contest.

One of the problems with analyzing a modern Presidential campaign is that so many people are involved.  There is no way for an outsider to know what campaign decisions are being made by the candidate, and what decisions are being made by professional campaigners.  From my position, I have no idea what Mitt Romney himself wants to do, or what Barack Obama wants to do, with regard to their respective campaigns.  I can only observe what is actually being done.  SOMEONE has apparently decided that the best way for President Obama to win re-election is to avoid honest discussion of his record, his accomplishments, his future goals, and his differences with Mitt Romney.  SOMEONE has decided on a strategy of distraction and misdirection.  And, as my magician friend explained, since they are doing it well, it is almost impossible to overcome.  Even those wishing to honestly examine the differences between the two candidates find themselves focusing on irrelevancies, like Mitt Romney's tax returns, or the comments of a previously-unknown Senatorial candidate.

Even if I knew nothing about the two candidates, and had no opinions about their positions or qualifications, this strategy would make me suspicious, and would make me tend to favor Mitt Romney.  Apparently, the Obama campaign believes that if the voters honestly compare Mitt Romney to Barack Obama, President Obama will be found lacking.

Please note that I am not stating whether I believe President Obama SHOULD be re-elected, or which candidate would make a better American President for the next four years.  I am simply observing the direction of President Obama's campaign, which, incidentally, is a direction that I do not like.  I would prefer a legitimate, open discussion of the differences between the candidates.

The last few weeks have introduced two new elements to the Presidential campaign -- a series of debates, and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2012.  With regard to the terrorist attacks, the Obama campaign has once again attempted to engage in distraction and misdirection, at some points seeming to blame the attacks themselves on Mitt Romney, and certainly attempting to turn the focus to Romney's response to the attacks, rather than the attacks, or the administration's response to the attacks.  With regard to the debates, slight-of-hand is proving to be somewhat more difficult -- though both sides have displayed a tendency to engage in "spin" rather than absolute truth.

Truth is complicated.