Christopher Hitchens has compiled a little list of issues on which Barack Obama has weighed in with some version of ambivalence or evasion:
Look at the record, and at Obama’s replies to essential and pressing questions. The surge in Iraq? I’ll answer that only if you insist. The credit crunch? Please may I be photographed with Bill Clinton’s economic team? Georgia? After you, please, Sen. McCain. A vice-presidential nominee? What about a guy who, despite his various qualities, is picked because he has almost no enemies among Democratic interest groups?
Nice job, but it’s only a start! Let’s expand:
Does present-day Zionism have justice on its side? Let me tell you about my sixth grade camp counselor. How do you intend to apply pressure on Iran? By tightening the screws or employing a similarly useless cliché . When does life begin? Sorry, above my pay grade. NAFTA? Are you asking me or my advisor? Troop withdrawal? Immediately! Or whenever . . .
Forget the fact that Obama has no paper trail. There’s scarcely a record of his convictions–period. It could be that this, in some way, resonates with an electorate that itself has been sitting on the fence on crucial issues for years. They want to stop supporting dictators, but avoid the messy work of building democracies. They want to win in Iraq, but they want to end the war. They want smaller government, but everyone should have healthcare. They want to save Darfur, but wait for the UN. They want to drill offshore, but scold about it being a temporary fix. They want loans they can’t pay back, but want to punish the lenders. Obama lets his supporters indulge their passions without ever having to act upon them. Choose Obama and you never have to choose again. That’s a very appealing (and very dangerous) delusion.