I wonder how much of the reason for maintaining the status quo revolves around allowing for corruption to exist and continue without interruption. I started reading an article in US News and World report today on the Randy Cunningham corruption case.

The FBI is guessing that some of DC's biggest power players will be taken down by the time the probe is complete. And at least as far as I've read, when analyzing money trails, at least 98% of the money that was used to support pols in their election campaigns so that the corruption could continue went the republican way.



>So many points to address here, the first is liberalism vs conservatism. This is a no brainer as to which ideology has their head in the sand.
>
>Conservatism opposed the following:
>- freedom of religion (support christianity over others)
>- abolition of slavery (think Jim Crow laws)
>- equal rights for women
>- equal rights for minorites
>- the teaching of well support science such as evolution
>
>Things that conservatism supported
>- McCarthyism
>- polygamy
>
>Who in their right mind would support a philosophy with a poor track record on some of the biggest advancements in civilization as that?
>
>Even looking at the definition of conservatism: "is a political philosophy that necessitates a defense of established values or the status quo". This is simply flawed. The idea that we've achieved perfection is unsupportable. Clearly from the list above conservatives were fighting to keep us in a society with a set of values that were terrible.