I think it's a more straightforward. The Democrats in Congress don't want to take responsibility for their past votes; so instead claim they've been duped.
The neo-neocon gets a little more psychological about it and here's a part of her post,
"But no matter; Bush lied.
I've become convinced that the key to this assertion is a relatively new and fundamental misunderstanding of the meaning of the term 'lied,' an error that has its genesis in the growth of narcissism (please see Dr. Sanity's fine series on the affliction).
In truth, the hallmark of a lie is that its locus is in the speaker. To be lying, the speaker must be aware of the falsehood of the utterances. So whether or not something is a lie has nothing to do with the listener, and everything to do with the teller.
But many listeners in our day and age have lost sight--not just of truth vs. relative truth, or objective vs. subjective truth--but of any truth-falsehood distinction outside of their own perceptions. So the new definition of a lie has become: something that fooled me. Something that I heard and thought was true, and then discovered wasn't true. It made me angry to be jerked around like that. So it's a lie."