This sort of iconography is not new. It's varied according to the available media and aesthetic sensibilities of the time. The Washington statue illustrates an important point: Most of this stuff isn't authorized by the person being depicted, would make that person distinctly uncomfortable, and is just a caricature.

What would Reagan have thought of being pictured on the rampage riding a T Rex?

I'll say it again: Quantifying who's being deified more, Obama or Reagan, is trivial. What's more interesting is how the iconography fits into our civic religion. In America we perform a trick akin to transubstantiation or the three-in-one: We take an ordinary human being and elevate him to a position of singular focus and power for a limited period; we make him king in all but name. And during that time we perform rituals every day that celebrate and deify this individual, while stoutly proclaiming "he is but a man". The White House is the stage for a 200-year-old theatrical production.

It has power. Ronald Reagan really was just a man, but the office elevated him. In the 80s my second ex-wife was in the PR business, and once escorted a group of kids to the Reagan White House for a ceremony honoring some corporate-sponsored program. She described how she was standing beside Reagan, and found herself starting to cry, from the effect of what I'd call his "Presidentiality". The setting, the rituals, the obeisance of the staff and aides, the tones of voice and the carefully-crafted words of a gifted actor, were all part of a powerful theatrical presentation designed to strum emotional chords. And it sure worked.

I know you won't let go of your notion that Obama is getting more than his fair share of adulation, but I don't consider it important enough to worry about. Collecting the iconic images and checking out everybody else's galleries was interesting, and that's that. There's nothing really new here.