Rand Paul was responding to a question on recess appointments in this interview, and invoked his protest against the Libyan war:

Because, see, earlier in the year, we took the president’s own words when he ran for office, saying no president should unilaterally go to war without the authority of Congress, Congressional authorization. His words exactly. And not one Democrat voted to support those words. They see it as a partisan attack on the president, but to me, I would have done it if it had been Bush. I mean, because it’s your words — either stand by them or not. You shouldn’t have one opinion when you’re running and another when you’re president.

I don’t doubt that Sen. Paul would have done the same thing if Bush had launched a war without any authorization. Unfortunately, it seems that no critic of the abuse of executive power ever adheres to the principles he previously claimed to have once he becomes part of the executive branch. Future administrations will not soon forget the abject failure of Congress to fulfill its responsibilities to check executive power last year during the Libyan war. They will conclude, probably correctly, that Congress is incapable of acting as a check on the executive, and expand executive power accordingly.