UnChecked UnBalanced Power? Or Road to Dictatorship

The Executive Branch in the United States Federal Government is really challenging the ideal of checks and balances between the branches of government. Now, George W. Bush wants to push the Patriot Act into permanent law.

I see a pattern coming along...

Geoffrey Stone, with Huffington Post, defends his position against Bush's unlimited spying with the fourth amendment. He will also write about the statutory issues in following articles.

Wait, isn't the president supposed to defend the constitution, not go against it?

Bernard Weiner, editor of the Crisis Papers, gave a list of his 12 political insights for 2005.

The Bush Administration has decided that they need to be able to use torture to fight the terrorists. Torture, even though we don't want anyone else to do it to us, we should be able to do it if we need to secure the United States, right?

We must continue the fight for freedom in Iraq; we must not pull our troups out; we must be victorious; a victory in Iraq is a victory against the terrorists. Common phrases for the defenders of the Iraq War. So, what are we really doing in Iraq, anyway? Isn't freedom something for the Iraqi people to win? Isn't victory something for the Iraqi people to accomplish?

As Commander-in-Chief, Bush is doing all this to protect the American people from terrorists. He must be able to defend national security. Even if it means that the role of a checked and balanced government must be overpowered? Did George W. Bush take the literal interpretation that the Executive Branch executes the law, just like Texas executes death-row inmates?

Or are all his actions in an effort to bring into realization a statement he made when first elected as president?

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long I'm the dictator." --George W. Bush, December 18, 2000

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it."--George W. Bush in Newsweek magazine, July 30, 2001.