In wife's candidacy, Clinton sees chance for validation

Former president Bill Clinton spoke at a campaign event for his wife at Storm Lake Middle School last month in Storm Lake, Iowa. He appears willing to do whatever is necessary to win. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON - As recently as two weeks ago, the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard questioned whether Bill Clinton really wants his wife to be president, suggesting that his sometimes lackluster appearances on the stump revealed the same kind of ambivalence he felt about former vice president Al Gore's campaign in 2000.

That was a dubious assertion back then, and should be even more so now that Bill Clinton has chosen to risk his own reputation as a positive campaigner to play an attack role against Barack Obama, sparing Hillary the dirty work.

In fact, all of Bill Clinton's actions since the start of his wife's campaign suggest that he is far more than just a dutiful supporter: He will do whatever is necessary to win.

That has included giving up the spotlight, which must be painful for someone as addicted to attention as Bill Clinton. He rarely takes the microphone when they appear together. And when he campaigns on his own, he is careful to subsume his identity into hers.

He praises her as the "ablest person" of their generation, gives her credit for the accomplishments of his administration, and when discussing current issues refers always to "Hillary's plan" and "her idea." Those expecting a vintage Bill Clinton speech, full of humor and lip-biting emotion, are invariably disappointed. But he makes the best possible case for Hillary by spelling out her plans in detail; he gives credibility to the claim that she knows what she'll do "on day one."

Since the Clintons's personal and professional lives are intertwined, and their motives are famously opaque, it is hard to know when they are being noble or self-interested, acting out of high purpose or low political gain. And so it is with Bill Clinton and his wife's candidacy: His tireless efforts can be read as either an honorable show of loyalty or a selfish desire to accrue more power through her.

Since almost the exact same thing has been said of her - and continues to be said - their true motives will probably never be known, at least in a way that would be believable to both their supporters and detractors.

But in an unguarded moment at a campaign appearance in Fort Dodge, Iowa, about a month ago, Bill Clinton offered some new clues as to why he wants his wife to become president.

A questioner asked the former president how he believes that history will view his administration, from 1993 to 2001. Clinton seemed uncharacteristically flummoxed, and offered a halting explanation of how he was a transitional president, helping the nation to adapt to changed circumstances in the world.

He clearly was referring to tapping the economic potential of the global marketplace opened by the end of the Cold War. And he suggested that his many smaller initiatives that were aimed at providing a loose safety net for economic change were part of preparing the nation for a new era. Clearly, he believed there was a big idea underneath all those piecemeal measures involving guaranteed family leave, pension security, the earned-income tax credit, government aid for children's healthcare, and more.

As an eight-year presidential record, it seemed a little thin. Bill Clinton's presidency was like Dwight D. Eisenhower's without the Cold War, another period of peaceful economic growth when, by the historical standards, seemingly little was accomplished. And yet historians are now divided over the Clinton years in the same way they are over Eisenhower's tenure from 1953 to 1961, with some believing that important groundwork was laid that pointed the way to future success.

The surprise is that Bill Clinton views his administration the same way, as a non-momentous time in which the seeds of future successes were planted. It's a modestly flattering assessment, but one that requires some actual future successes to justify it.

If Bill Clinton is right in believing that he helped ensure American leadership of the world by unleashing the country's economic strength in the global marketplace, while providing just enough financial security to quell the pain of economic transition, then the last seven years have been deeply troubling to his legacy.

George W. Bush's unbridled faith in the markets has prompted just the sort of backlash that Clinton feared and guarded against; if the next president swings in the other direction and opts for protectionism - as John Edwards certainly would and Obama might - then the whole philosophy of the Clinton years would be discredited.

Bill Clinton needs Hillary Clinton to validate his own presidential record.

Peter S. Canellos is the Globe's Washington bureau chief. National Perspective is his weekly analysis of events in the capital and beyond.