The Ambiguous Case

This headline--Collins ambiguous on Iraq issues--and the lede that follows speak volumes:

Maine Sen. Susan Collins carved a middle path during Tuesday's Capitol Hill hearing on the war in Iraq, neither criticizing nor praising last year's troop surge and offering no opinion on its success or failure.

Striking, isn't it?

On the most important issue of our time, six years into a debacle of world-historical proportions that she helped set in motion, it's not at all clear where Sen. Collins stands.

Sure, we know what she's against--withdrawal deadlines and redeployment timelines. And, yes, she supports a toothless bill that slaps a new name on the mission without forcing any change in policy.

But is there any binding legislation that she does support?

We know what Rep. Allen thinks:

The only way to change direction in Iraq is for Congress to set a firm, responsible deadline for bringing our brave men and women home. I will continue to vote against funding for the war that does not include a clear and responsible end to our involvement in Iraq’s ongoing religious civil war.

We know what Sen. Snowe thinks:

It's long past time for us to redeploy and transition our forces to a change of mission.

But Collins has tried to split the distance, rhetorically, between occupation critics (like Snowe and Allen) and the war's supporters--all the while rejecting any plan that would in any way tie the hands of President Bush.

This inert, muddled approach may be politically astude given the Maine media's preference for empty centrism over clarity and sound policy. But it ain't exactly leadership.

UPDATE: Collins is twisting in the wind on the Colombia trade bill, too. (And check out the wildly misleading headline.)