Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 6 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
In essence what Robb said was that, if the party is to regain the confidence of the American people, it has to have the guts to say “no” when its constituent groups make demands'which are irresponsible, contrary to the best interests of the nation, or - in effect - politically dumb.
It was quite a litany of “noes” he ticked off, lightly sugar-coating each with a corresponding “yes” which the party should also say to each group.
The Democratic party, explained Robb, should say yes to labor's insistence on job security and fair wages, but no to its demands for protectionism and artificial barriers to competition. (Labor, inddently, was one of the groups which was hopping mad.)
To businesses and their lobbyists, Robb would say yes to innovation and free markets, but no to regulations which protect inefficiency and frustrate competition.
To teachers, yes to higher salaries and increased respect, but ho to practices which reward mediocrity and “ignore the performance of our best.” (This was a plug for his master teachers program.)
To students, yes to educational access but no to social promotions. To the American people, yes to arms control but no to “showboat diplomacy.”
To the Pentagon, yes to a strong national defense but no to “cosy contracts” and weapons systems which don’t work.
To the GOP, yes to fiscal responsibility and a balanced budget, but no to denying women fiill constitutional protection. (A renewed commitment to the Equal Rights Amendment and a tap on the wedge to widen the gender gap.)
To the Russians, yes to solidarity and support for human dignity in the third world, but no to continued oppression of Andre Sahkarov.
81.6%