I hope that this isn't too off-topic, but :
In my view, Behe is an evolutionist with just a tinge of creationist in him.
My creo-ometer tends to go off quite strongly though whenever I see any of his arguments used, for a couple of reasons:
The arguments have an uncanny resemblence to YEC-like ones that misinterpret the incomplete fossil record. A YEC would point to a gap in the fossil record, whereas a Beherite would point to a gap in the biochemical record. The same modus operandi, just drawing the line (where evolution can be used as an explanation) in different places.
Many out-and-out creationists seem to jump on the Behe bandwagon. Behe knows his audience and so pushes the "God must have done it" angle harder than the evo side of things. For example - the common descent thing is only compelling, how about pretty much unassailable? Of course a cynic might point out that he has to sell books and go on lecture tours!
™ Version 4.2