I don’t see any link between the Imperial Presidency – one based on the idea the president is king during his term and can’t be held to any law and the “cult of the presidency” as described in this excerpt.
While it’s pretty clear that the country does hold the president responsible for more than they should, but it does make a difference who runs the country.
Healy takes aim at that unconfined conception of presidential responsibility, identifying it as the source of much of our political woe and some of the gravest threats to our liberties. If the public expects the president to heal everything that ails us, the president is going to demand—or seize—the power necessary to handle that responsibility.
That’s silly, it’s because george bush and his imperial presidency that has tried to overstep his constitution powers that has led to the great distrust of him, the republican party and john McCain(deserved or not). When bill clinton was president, i wasn’t thinking “Why doesn’t he break the law to get more done”, though i did hear republicans in the media asking that of Bush.
Certainly much of the public’s disillusionment with the political system and politicians is that we expect too much from them.