Let's face it. This isn't about games anymore.

Let me start off by de-fanging the word "Dictator." There is nothing inherently evil with the word or idea behind being a dictator. Many great cultures have been ruled by dictators and monarchs. In essence, a dictator is just a leader who says to his people, "My job requires me to do things which I cannot, in any effective capacity, do while staying within the law. I'm going to need to be, for the forseeable future, above the law". He rules over a government of men, rather than a government of laws.

The only problem with becoming a dictator is that it has to be done just right. Now, I have no great head for history, but it seems to me that these things have a certain logical progression. There are certain people who don't want a new dictator, and so, a new dictator has to remove that resistance right from the start. It works like this:

1) Military leader comes to town, and sees that he has the biggest military strength in the area.
2) Military leader disarms the people as best he can, by telling them that they will be safer if his army is the only one with weapons.
3) Military leader declares himself above the law.
4) NOW THIS IS IMPORTANT - Military leader disbands all other forms of government, and kills or exiles any people who followed the old government.

Without that fourth step, you're just some guy who can still be prosecuted by the previous government. That step is absolutely critical in solidifying your rule.

So, when a story comes out that says, "George Bush okay's warrentless wiretaps" Congress decides to send a message to Bush by refusing to continue the Patriot Act. In response, Bush says that he did allow the wiretaps, and that he'll do it again. This, in essence, is step three. The president has stated that he's above the law, and not even worried about it.

But he missed step four. Right after saying that he'd continue to allow the illegal wiretaps, Bush should have dissolved the House and Senate, exiled or executed any congressman who resisted, and disbanded the federal court in favor of a national military courtmartial system.

Without step four, he's only a guy who says he is above the law. Like the one crazy guy every year who says he's not going to pay taxes, because income tax is unconstitutional. In those situations, the IRS usually slaps the guy down. Should Bush expect less?

Without disbanding our government, Bush runs the risk of being impeached, or worse, voted out of office by the representative democracy that gave him power in the first place.

I'm not trying to demonize Bush for declaring himself our new monarch. I'm just saying he needs to finish the job. What's the point of being the leader of the worlds most powerful military, and being above the law, if you're not going to declare yourself king for life?