It seems to me that what actually happened was that a lot of Democrats voted to allow the President to call the shot as to whether or not to goto war with many assurances from the him that he would only do so as a last resort. Admittedly it was pretty obvious that the Bush administration was in a rush to war, but when it comes down to it though, which is better: voting against a bill that is going to pass anyway and go down to defeat in the next election? or voting for it in hopes that futher down the road one can make a difference in congress rather than from out in the wilderness? A choice of the lesser of two evils. Also one that a politician can't really come out and explain when sie is running for re-election.
Lesser Evil