of course, back when they ran "communist countries," they tried to make sure that
no-one else _could_ govern unless they'd already proved their loyalty...
Jim D.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Chris Doss" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 3/6/2004 3:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Ceaucescu and Romanian transition
I don't know about the Romanian situation in particular, but one reason why
former "Communist" leaders are in power thruought EE is that they are the only ones
with experience in actually running a country.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 13:46:35 -0800
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Ceaucescu and Romanian transition
> given how bad the Rumanian government was before Ceaucescu was overthrown, I
find the view presented by NPR poet-commentator to be a bit more plausible: the same
thugs that ruled before the "revolution" ended up in power afterwards (with the
notable exception of Ceaucescu and his family).
>
