Ryan Devereaux

Meet the world’s oldest Senate candidate

95-year-old Ken Hechler talks to Salon about his unlikely campaign to win Robert Byrd's Senate seat

Former West Virginia congressman and secretary of state Ken Hechler discusses life experiences before watching an advance screening of the new documentary about his career in public office at the Marshall University Drinko Library on Thusday, April 3, 2008, in Huntington, W.Va. A premiere viewing of the two-hour documentary "Ken Hechler: In Pursuit of Justice," will take place in the Memorial Student Center's Don Morris Room on the campus of Marshall University on Saturday, April 5, 2008. (AP Photo/Mark Webb)(Credit: Mark Webb)

In his 95 years, Ken Hechler has recorded history from the front lines in World War II, debriefed Hitler’s top commanders before the Nuremberg Trials, advised Harry Truman, marched with Martin Luther King, published several books, been the subject of a documentary, and — somewhere between all of this — served nine terms in Congress and four as West Virginia’s secretary of state.

Earlier this week, he unexpectedly jumped into the race to succeed the late Sen. Robert Byrd, who passed away in late June at the age of 92. Running against Gov. Joe Manchin in the Democratic primary, Hechler will be (to put it politely) a prohibitive underdog. He talked with Salon on Thursday about his latest campaign and his long life — and even sang a few lines from a John Denver song.

You say that you aren’t running anyone and that you want to use this race to raise awareness of mountaintop removal from strip mining. Why single out this issue?

I’m not really running for the Senate, I’m running to enable the people of West Virginia to register at the polls their opposition to this devastating practice, which hurts so many people in the valleys when they dump the rocks in the soil and all the things that they’re blasting out of the mountains into people’s front yards. Ruining the aquifers so that if they have water wells they run dry and also drying up the streams where people are fishing and using for recreation. And it’s a practice that is so vicious that it outta be abolished. Every time a poll is taken in West Virginia it’s two to one in favor of abolishing it but there’s never been an opportunity for people to put it on the ballot and so I’m saying every vote for Ken Hechler is a vote tantamount to opposition to mountaintop removal. That’s the only reason I’m in the campaign.

So your goal isn’t to win?

The primary goal is not to win as much as it is to call attention to the issue and give people an opportunity to express their opinion on the ballot. That’s my primary aim.

How seriously should voters take your age into consideration?

They can take into consideration anything under the sun. They know me. They know that I’m 95 years old. They know that I’m giving them an opportunity to vote against mountaintop removal.

You’ve been described as an enemy of “machine politics.” What does that mean to you?

I’m not only an enemy of “machine politics,” but I’m also an enemy of discrimination and an enemy of the devastation of God’s creation; the mountains of western Virginia. I’m an advocate of protecting the environment. West Virginia is called the mountain state according to the song by John Denver, “Country Roads,” which starts (begins singing), “Almost heaven, West Virginia…” You don’t want them to say, “Almost level, West Virginia.”

Exactly. OK, a little bit about your personal history. You were drafted for World War II and ended up working as a combat historian. Can you explain importance of this kind of work?

Well, it’s very, very important not only to glorify the Army, but particularly to assemble lessons learned in combat for the purpose of educating the people at West Point and the service schools and the Commander General Staff Academy. That program was just getting off the ground when I went to Europe in the spring of 1944 and I helped to organize the administration of that program and to make sure that we covered all the strategic actions along the front lines. For example, I was about 10 miles away from the town of Remagen, between Cologne and Koblenz along the Rhine, when the electrifying news came in that we had captured the only bridge over the Rhine River that was still standing. The Germans waited until the last minute to destroy it because they wanted to retreat some of their big artillery and tanks towards the bridge so that we would capture that. It was a beginning of the end of the war, March 7, 1945, when that bridge was captured and war was over in Europe May 8, 1945. I wrote a book on it called “The Bridge of Remagen,” which was made into a full-length motion picture. The book sold 650,000 copies and, as I say, they made a movie out of it.

There was a film made about your life (2008′s “Ken Hechler: The Pursuit of Justice”) and it singled out the need to “establish justice” as the core of your political philosophy. What does establishing justice mean to you?

It means that legislation has got to be fair to all the groups and as Thomas Jefferson once said, “Equal rights for all and special privileges for none.” That is the root of my philosophy and it also motivated President Harry Truman when I was on the White House staff.

What threatens justice in the U.S. today?

Well, I think justice should involve the abolition of mountaintop removal and anything that discriminates against a group of people in this country.

You’ve spoken and written about your admiration for FDR’s leadership during the Great Depression. How do you compare the current White House to his?

Well, I think the Obama administration is doing its best, and I applaud the fact that they were able to get healthcare approved but in terms of the environment I think perhaps they could do a little better in terms of taking leadership. They’re trying to create too much of a balance between the coal industry and it’s devastating many of our areas. I’d love to push them a little more in terms of protecting the environment.

You were the only member of Congress to march with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at Selma in 1965. Why did you do it — and why didn’t any of your colleagues?

I can’t answer the second part of your question, that’s up to the other people of Congress. I was on the Space Committee in Congress [we took] a group of U.S. senators down to Cape Canaveral to watch a space shot and I began to read about the billy clubs and tear gas, the beatings that those people like Dr. King … who were put in jail for disturbing the peace just because they were trying to carry out the 15th Amendment to the Constitution that guarantees the right to vote for all people of all races and creeds. The Ku Klux Klan was trying to prevent that from happening. I asked myself, “What is more important for me, as a teacher of government who believes in the principles of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, to head a junket to Cape Canaveral or to be down at the front lines of democracy in Selma, Alabama?” That was an easy choice.

Where are the front lines of democracy in the United States today?

Here again, I have been eager to be in the front lines of democracy when protesting mountaintop removal. One of the reasons I’m running this year for the U.S. Senate is to give people a voice to show on the ballot where they stand. That’s part of the front lines of democracy. I also believe in the public financing of elections, which Theodore Roosevelt initially stood for, for the federal government, which is now in existence in three states, Arizona, Maine, and Vermont, and hopefully we can get it extended to other states.

You were arrested rather recently, within the last couple years, for protesting mountaintop removal.

I believe, as Martin Luther King did, that it is part of the American tradition to not be afraid to be arrested on behalf of a great cause where the law is not being enforced and the Constitution is not being enforced.

Will you travel your state as extensively in this campaign as you have in the past?

Well, I’ve got a lot of friends in West Virginia all over the state and I’m depending on them to help.

Gen. Petraeus’ COIN jam

This week's Taliban attack on a NATO airfield underscored an ugly dilemma for the newly confirmed U.S. commander

Smoke rises outside an airfield used by Afghan and international forces in Jalalabad, east of Kabul, Afghanistan, Wednesday, June 30, 2010. Militants set off a car bomb and stormed the entrance to the airport and eight insurgents died in the ensuing gunbattle, authorities said. (AP Photo)(Credit: AP)

The Taliban wants David Petraeus to know it can strike at will. On Wednesday, in an attempt to send a message to the soon-to-be head of U.S. and NATO operations in Afghanistan, Taliban fighters attacked a NATO base in Jalalabad.

Al-Jazeera reports that a suicide bomber detonated a car outside of the compound’s gate, near its airfield, while a number of other Taliban gunmen assaulted the base with AK-47 and RPG fire. There are conflicting reports as to whether the insurgents managed to breach the perimeter of the base. According to NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), eight Taliban fighters died in the skirmish.

The attack, which was similar to one carried out on the Bagram airfield on May 19 and another launched three days later at the Kandahar airfield in southern Afghanistan, raises significant questions about the environment U.S. and NATO forces face. In the words of an ISAF spokesperson, “Violence [in Afghanistan] is really at an all-time high.” June, with its 60 U.S. casualties, has been the deadliest month of fighting since the war began nearly a decade ago.

While these numbers continue to rise, a high-level review of the rules that constrain U.S. and NATO forces within Afghanistan appears to be forthcoming. In his Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday, Petraeus promised to “look very hard” at the rules of engagement set out by his predecessor, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, and said that it was a “moral imperative” to grant troops “all the support they need when they are in a tough situation.” However, he also made a distinction between McChrystal’s rules and strategic direction and their current implementation; the former he supported and the latter he took issue with suggesting that some units have been overly “bureaucratic” in their implementation.

Petraeus appears to be making an attempt to assuage the very real concerns of some of his troops, who feel that the rules they are expected to abide by — rules the people shooting at them are not subject to– are unnecessarily putting them in harm’s way. But, Petraeus also has to appear to stay the course in terms of counterinsurgency (COIN) fundamentals, such as making extensive efforts not to kill innocent people. The tricky part is that the main argument against McChrystal’s rules of engagement is not that they are too bureaucratic; it’s that they are overreaching and potentially dangerous.

Petreaus really can’t have it both ways on this issue. If he actually responds to the demands of so many of his troops on the ground and relaxes the rules of engagement — something he seems hesitant to do — then U.S. forces run the risk of killing more Afghan civilians and, in turn, providing rhetorical fodder that the Taliban and al-Qaida would certainly use for recruitment. But if he chooses the “less bureaucratic” version of McChrystal’s COIN approach, June’s status as the deadliest month in the history of the Afghanistan war probably won’t last for long. 

Continue Reading Close

Heroic healthcare innovators and their innovations

Slide show: Eight exciting ways that doctors and scientists are cutting costs and increasing the quality of care

Richard Santulli, chairman of the Intrepid Fallen Hero Fund, holding scissors at center, and Arnold Fisher, honorary chairman of the Intrepid Fallen Hero Fund, with scissors third from right, cut the ribbon during the dedication of the National Intrepid Center of Excellence at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., Thursday, June 24, 2010. Also participating in the event is Assistant Veterans Affairs Secretary Tammy Duckworth, with cane. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)(Credit: Susan Walsh)

View the slide show

 In critical areas like quality, access, equity and — above all — cost, the U.S. healthcare system lags embarrassingly behind those of other developed nations. Congress spent much of the last year debating and ultimately passing a reform plan. Time will tell whether its goals will be met. The real hope, though, can be found outside Washington, where potentially revolutionary innovations in care are being explored by doctors and scientists every day.

In this slide show, Salon looks at some of the innovations with the most promise of cutting costs and improving efficiency and patient care.

View the slide show

Andrew Bacevich on Gen. McChrystal’s ouster

The author of "The Limits of Power" defends the ousted general, says not to expect strategic changes

Andrew Bacevich

Andrew Bacevich, a leading critic of the Afghanistan war and the author of “The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism,” spoke with Salon today about the significance of General Stanley McChrystal’s ouster.

Should Gen. McChrystal have been fired?

I believe this matter has already been settled. My view is that he should not have been fired.

Can you discuss what may have been frustrating McChrystal?

It’s completely speculative, but I would think there’s ample reason for the guy to be frustrated in the sense that he’s been engaged in wars for about the last six years. He’s constantly deployed. He never gets to see his family. I think he behaved stupidly. But I certainly understand these are people who are under tremendous stress. And that sometimes causes people to do stupid things.

Have you seen anything like this before?

Of course. In the Korean War, President Truman fired Douglas MacArthur for professional misbehavior that was far more egregious than what McChrystal was guilty of.

McChrystal was well known for his commitment to a specific counterinsurgency strategy (COIN). Can you describe this strategy?

I think it’s a practical matter. What they’re trying to do is bring security to the Afghan population and once security has been established, they’re trying to deliver good governance with the expectation that security plus governance will win the people over to support the government of President Karzai. It’s what they’re trying to do. I think it’s a defective concept and I don’t think it’s working.

Part of the idea behind COIN is unity and close coordination between civilian and military institutions. The Karzai government has expressed a desire to keep McChrystal around. Would his absence undermine the possibility of such a closeness?

Who knows why they’d [the Karzai government] say that? Your question assumes that there has been effective coordination between the military and the civilians, between NATO and the Afghan government. I really am very skeptical of that assumption.

Will the COIN strategy continue in the absence of McChrystal?

I don’t know. I think that’s a big question. One thing that may happen — may — is that the strategic review scheduled for December may happen now and, depending on how that review goes, the whole counterinsurgency notion could potentially be scrapped. But I think that remains to be seen.

There has been talk that President Obama is having second thoughts about going “all in” in Afghanistan…

I hope so.

…could this present him with that opening?

It could, but politically, it would be even more difficult to make a major course change than it would have been last December. Because, as a consequence of the decision he made to surge in December it really is very much viewed as Obama’s war. So now, if he decides, “Well, I’m gonna go back in the other direction,” it will politically be very difficult to do.

McChrystal has a long history working with and expanding the role of special operations (particularly during his tenure as commander of the Joint Special Operations Command). Could his absence impact the scope of special operations in Afghanistan?

I don’t believe that’s something we would say McChrystal did. Probably something he implemented because senior civilian leaders told him to implement it. It was clear during the Rumsfeld era that Rumsfeld was very much enamored with special operations. From that point forward I think more and more emphasis has been placed on special operations forces.

Does Obama hold the same high regard for special operations?

It would seem to be the case.

The Rolling Stone article mentioned that McChrystal still maintained much respect for Secretary of State Clinton. Do you have any idea why?

Well, she’s a very hawkish Democrat. No question about it.

Continue Reading Close

McCain, Lieberman, Graham on Rolling Stone article

Unlike Eric Cantor, they resist trying to blame President Obama

John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman

A joint statement from John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman on Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s Rolling Stone comments differs quite a bit from the one issued by House Republican Whip Eric Cantor:

“We have the highest respect for General McChrystal and honor his brave service and sacrifice to our nation. General McChrystal’s comments, as reported in Rolling Stone, are inappropriate and inconsistent with the traditional relationship between Commander-in-Chief and the military. The decision concerning General McChrystal’s future is a decision to be made by the President of the United States.”

 

Gresham Barrett’s new ad won’t change much

In a desperate bid to catch up to Nikki Haley, the South Carolina gubernatorial candidate plays the Christian card

South Carolina Republican gubernatorial candidate Gresham Barrett’s new “Shake Up Columbia” ad has certainly made waves in the blogosphere. Among the more talked about elements is a line in which a drill sergeant (now a reoccurring character in Barrett’s ads) refers to the South Carolinian as “a Christian man who won’t embarrass us.” But it’s doubtful that the provocative appeal to religion and gender will help close the massive gap — measured at 34 points in a poll released today — between Barrett and fellow Republican Nikki Haley in the June 22 runoff.

“It seems unlikely, unless some new scandal breaks, with definitive evidence regarding Haley, that Barrett could somehow make up the remaining support he would need to overtake her and actually win the primary,” University of South Carolina political science professor David Darmofal said.

In Tuesday’s preliminary vote, Haley topped a four-way GOP field but finished just shy of an outright majority, which would have made her the nominee on the spot. Barrett finished a very distant second, nearly 30 points behind her. Haley has been hit by allegations that she engaged in mutliple extramarital affairs.

Darnofal noted that “it is not unusual for candidates in the South to use religion to distinguish themselves.”

“The distinction in this new ad is that he is saying that he is a Christian family man who won’t embarrass us. That would seem to be pointing to some past event,” he said.

Of course, there are several possible “past events” that the ad might be referring to: Haley affair allegations; the well-documented infidelity of South Carolina’s outgoing governor, Mark Sanford (whose allies are strongly backing Haley); or possibly Haley’s childhood years as a Sikh, or maybe even a combination of all of the above. 

Continue Reading Close

Page 1 of 2 in Ryan Devereaux

www.salon.com/writer/ryan_devereaux/index.html