Word: democratizer
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Gorbachev's tentative domestic reforms have so far succeeded only in disabling the old centrally planned economy without providing an effective replacement. He took over the Communist Party in 1985 thinking he could energize and modernize the existing machinery. He was neither a democrat nor a free-marketeer and described himself as a dedicated Communist. But in time he discovered that the party bureaucrats were blocking him because they oppose change in general and treasure their power and privileges. Gorbachev then decided to try to blast the party out of its executive positions and transfer power to a reconstructed government...
...that is what quietly unfolded when former Sen. Sam Nunn, the Georgia Democrat, recently appeared for just over an hour before the Senate Armed Services subcommittee...
...Congress and two presidential campaigns? Speaking last Friday as part of the Harvard College Democrats’ Conversations with the Candidates series, Kucinich answered questions ranging from the predictable—Iraq?—to the personal: What will Kucinich do if he fails again to win the Democratic nomination? “Kucinich [has] more experience so he seems less afraid of taking strong stances,” says James E. Goldschmidt ’09, who attended the event. “Every Democrat running for President has to condemn the war, but they?...
...Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama received more than half of the political contributions made by Harvard professors and staff in the first quarter of 2007, according to an analysis of federal disclosure data released Monday. The $78,000 that the Illinois senator raised from Harvard affiliates underscores the depth of support the former Harvard Law Review president and University of Chicago law lecturer enjoys among Harvard professors. Obama’s chief rival for the Democratic nomination, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, took in less than half of Obama’s Harvard total, raising over $33,000 from...
Lieberman is a sad excuse for a Democrat, but he has no incentive to change his affiliation. Rather, he uses his image as a “rogue” senator to appeal to voters, and to further himself in the Senate. As a “Democrat-Independent,” he maintains the Democrats’ 51-49 majority, not out of principle but because it affords him a tactical position to wield unwarranted bargaining power. But this “independent” streak is a disguise for his true political orientation. Far from a thoughtful Democrat...