I entered health care for a couple reasons, probably the most pertinent being patient care, albeit the pay is not bad either. I'm currently a student, by the way.
You're view of supervision is apparent in the word choice of your question. "Dictate?" I'm sorry to say, but your question is inaccurate, and shows you have a negative view of superiors.
All examples I've seen, and the few I've partaken in, the anesthesiologist never dictated anything - supervised and outlined a procedure, yes, but never dictated. There's a big difference.
The point is, while I'll have 2 years of excellent training to prepare me for a field in anesthesia, the attending MDA has 2 additional years of anesthesia training, as well as 4 years of diagnostic training (med school) on top of what I have. My question to you is: Why is having that resource at your helm a bad thing?
Ultimately, I could care less about titles or all the "independent/dependent" noise. Call me naive. I love anesthesia and the responsibility that comes with it. If all my patients have good surgeries and I leave them with a smile (the patient), I walk out the doors at the end of the day with a smile on my face. Do I care at the end of the day if I was supervised? Hell no.
Clearly, I don't understand the independence thing, whatever "it (being this superiority complex that CRNA's argue about)" is. And, I'd consider that a good thing, as it seems like a pointless power struggle and monopolization to me - point in case, the CRNA's that are on an AA message board ranting and raving. What do you get, as a CRNA defender, out of coming here and debating this?