From Multiple Choice Mitt, of all people:
In an interview with The Hill, Romney said, “We as Republicans misspeak when we say we don’t like regulation. We like modern, up-to-date dynamic regulation that is regularly reviewed, streamlined, modernized and effective.”
Romney’s comments come as he mulls another run at the White House and the Republican Party grapples with how to come up with producing solutions to the housing and financial crises that were triggered by a variety of factors, including a lack of government regulation and enforcement.
“Someone shouldn’t be able to just call themselves a doctor without going to medical school,” Romney said.
“You have to have regulation, and we value regulation. What we don’t like is when you have regulation that was written in the 1920s or the early 1900s that hasn’t been updated for modern events.”
Romney added that regulations on some parts of the financial sector are “overly burdensome” while others are “nonexistent.”
Of course the problem is twofold. First, the people in Mitt’s base oppose vaccines on cervical cancer because it might make the young hussies promiscuous, so I’m not too sure they really care whether or not people go to medical school before they call themselves a doctor. Ask Dr. Laura about that.
Second, while I agree that some areas of the financial sector probably are burdened by antiquated regulation and that some areas are completely unregulated, my problem is with the likely Republican solution should we put these guys back into office. Is there anyone out there who doesn’t think their solution will be to simply get rid of the antiquated regulations and ignore the unregulated areas and let the “invisible hand” bitch slap us again?