I believed that Bill Clinton was a charming sociopath during his administration. Yet we saw, once he had the rug pulled out from under him when his Democrat house and senate was swept out of office, that Clinton was capable of pragmatism. He didn't necessarily want to tear down and reconstruct America. No, he was blessed with a temporary pause (relatively speaking) in world hostilities and an economic boom cycle. So, Slick decided to “let the good times roll”. Made his job easier, and left him with time to chase skirts.
Obama is also a sociopath, but Obama’s not glib. He's charming, in a Che Guevara sort of way, and ultimately, he's cold and humorless. The problem is that he has an underlying contempt for the way America is, he is not pragmatic, and he smells a future with unfettered power and authority. He's a soft tyrant. The question is just how soft.
All Bill really wanted was the goodies - the skirts, the TV appearances, the fawning press. Obama is hollow on the inside and is looking for power to define himself. He has always gravitated to vicious radicals, such as Wright or Ayers, because they give him a sort of mold in which to cast his undefined personality.
I don’t think he’s really soft, and in fact every time he has been challenged (such as by other Dem candidates) he gets quite vicious. But he doesn’t really have a well-developed program of his own, and he needs these people around him to define him and supply his program. Looking at them, I’d say this is not promising for the rest of us.