Time magazine, today:

McCain’s camp tried to argue on Wednesday that Obama is soft on missile defense, but, in fact, he supports it.

Really?

Once again, this is an issue in which Obama’s view tends to change depending on which audience in front of him. It is easy to find this October 2007 video to a liberal group, where Obama says, “Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems.” This is the video where Obama pledges to “seek a global ban on the production of fissile material,” which would effectively ban nuclear power around the world.

But on Obama’s web site, touting his support for a strong national defense, it says, “He has called for continuing U.S. cooperation with Israel in the development of missile defense systems.” On the related fact sheet, he cites the Arrow, which is already deployed.

Just about a year ago, Obama offered a “well, if it works” response:

“The Bush Administration has been developing plans to deploy interceptors and radar systems in Poland and the Czech Republic as part of a missile defense system designed to protect against the potential threat of Iranian nuclear armed missiles. If we can responsibly deploy missile defenses that would protect us and our allies we should – but only when the system works. We need to make sure any missile defense system would be effective before deployment. The Bush Administration has in the past exaggerated missile defense capabilities and rushed deployments for political purposes. The Bush Administration has also done a poor job of consulting its NATO allies about the deployment of a missile defense system that has major implications for all of them. We must not allow this issue to divide “new Europe” and “old Europe,” as the Bush Administration tried to do over Iraq.”

Liberal fans of Obama like Katrina Vanden Heuvel interpreted that as a sign that Obama would stop any deployment.