Apparently, admitting a mistake is not possible for the men who are running for president.

Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic nominee, on Monday joined President Bush by saying he would have voted to authorize the war in Iraq even though the justifications for the war have proven false.

We chided the president for blurry hindsight. Now, it seems, Kerry’s campaign is taking the same line. The candidate couched the decision as one about presidential authority: “Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have.” But that sounds like a dodge.

The authority to declare war rests squarely on Congress. But practice has made the notion outdated. Wars are launched, fought, won and lost without ever being declared. Congress has abdicated its responsibility on this score.

The vote to authorize the use of force is not the same thing as declaring war or giving the thumbs-up to an invasion. But the vote did give President Bush political cover for his actions.

Knowing now that Iraq was not an imminent threat, did not help al-Qaida in the Sept. 11 attacks and could not threaten the United States or its allies with chemical or biological weapons, it is difficult to justify an invasion that has gone so poorly and cost so many lives.

We know the intelligence was flawed. We know the people of Iraq, while hopeful, still struggle against terror. We know corruption and violence continue.

We don’t know if democracy can be created out of this mess.

Kerry says he would have carried out the war and occupation differently. That suggests he can recognize failure when he sees it.

“Why did we rush to war without a plan to win the peace? Why did you rush to war on faulty intelligence and not do the hard work necessary to give America the truth?” Kerry questioned.

Why would he vote to authorize the same war knowing all these things? That’s a better question for the Democrat to answer.