The same laws that were in place under Bush are still in place under Obama. Why are you not yelling at him for it too?

1I don't accept that the law defines morality. There have been, and still are, some obviously unjust laws, in the USA, and around the world.

2 I do pity anyone who is driven to crimes such as pickpocketing or illegal immigration as a result of extreme poverty, or the threat of violence etc where they currently live.

Points 4 and 5 contradict 6 btw.

As for point 3, I'm not saying that illegal immigration doesn't disadvantage those who live in the rich western nations, but considering that legal immigration is not possible for these people, and that we in the rich countries do fuck all else to help them, maybe we should accept a slight economic burden.

Let me just see if I follow....

If my lot in life is far worse then yours, I should feel empowered to take from you? Let's say I live in the street, and you own a 3 million dollar home. Let's say you come home one day, and I have snuck into your house and happen to be sitting on the couch.

Forget sitting on the couch, I am working my ass of in your home. Let's say I cleaned up the place, and chose to keep the place clean. Does this mean you should be obligated to feed me, house me, provide medical insurance for me? 

This is the exact same concept. 

It is interesting about Ron Paul.  Because of his consistent views on things, which put him on the outside of the normal politics, he gets airtime others don't (this and he has an anti-war stance that plays with the left now, along with consistency in respecting the Constitution).  Ron Paul is somewhere between Libertarian and Conservative, so he isn't fully in either camp at this point. 

When laws or a tax reform is passed it is hard to remove the legislation. The legislation would have to be repealed and passed by a majority in both houses of Federal government. Obama would not be able to repeal the legislation Bush Jr.  passed through as law. Governments rarely over turn taxes when they are introduced. 

The most vocal opponents of immigration are social conservatives. Social progressives/liberals would be more accepting and tolerant towards immigrants. Most illegal immigrants remain undetected and maintain a low profile. 

A strong border control  and strict  passport system would keep tracks on people coming and going from the country. Illegal immigration is a huge problem that brings in diseases, terrorists, fugitives, drugs, illegal arms, sex workers and other problems from overseas into another country. Quarantine  is good policy. 

There are those on the left that do.  The Young Turks, with Cenk, happen to do this a lot.  However, you have similar to what is seen on the right wing side.  The other side is SO vilified (no one is no longer just wrong, but evil) that there is so much fear if the other side wins, no one wants to take to task their side, out of fear it would mean the other side would win.  The GOP and the Democrats are playing this fear up, so that they can both throw out principles in the name of obtaining and keeping power.

To flip what you said on its head, why wasn't the Bush administration taken to task more about the deficit and shreding the constitution?  No one seems to hold their own accountable when they are in power.  In fact, anyone who questioned the last administration's actions was put in the traitor camp, because we were "at war".  The muzzling regarding the Iraq war started BEFORE it began, and then people were told to shut up AFTER it started.  And take Cindy Shehan.  Apparently it is only trendy to report what fits the pattern, because I believe she is protesting Obama being in Iraq and Afghanistan. But that isn't worth anyone's time I guess.

We are not talking abou tax reform, we are talking about wire taps. I think it would be simple for Obama to remove the ability to wiretap people.

He has not done it, and it's odd that the liberals who were so up in arms about the Bush administration wiretapping, have not said one word about the fact that Obama leads under the same set of rules.

As for taxes, we change the tax laws every year. It's very easy to remove anything we want with respect to taxation. We do it all the time.

You must have not been on these forums when Bush was in office, because a lot of us were bitching about him. I sure was.

Then again, I am not a Republican or a Democrate, so no one in office can I call "my own".

Ron Paul would be the closest to my views.

I think you need to study what the members of the Democrat party actually stand for:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10024163-38.html

The next year, months before the Oklahoma City bombing took place, Biden introduced another bill called the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995. It previewed the 2001 Patriot Act by allowing secret evidence to be used in prosecutions, expanding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and wiretap laws, creating a new federal crime of "terrorism" that could be invoked based on political beliefs, permitting the U.S. military to be used in civilian law enforcement, and allowing permanent detection of non-U.S. citizens without judicial review. The Center for National Security Studies said the bill would erode  "constitutional and statutory due process protections" and would "authorize the Justice Department to pick and choose crimes to investigate and prosecute based on political beliefs and associations."

Biden himself draws parallels between his 1995 bill and its 2001 cousin. "I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill," he said when the Patriot Act was being debated, according to the New Republic, which described him as "the Democratic Party's de facto spokesman on the war against terrorism."

Biden's chronology is not accurate: the bombing took place in April 1995 and his bill had been introduced in February 1995. But it's true that Biden's proposal probably helped to lay the groundwork for the Bush administration's Patriot Act.

In 1996, Biden voted to keep intact an ostensibly anti-illegal immigration bill that outlined what the Real ID Act would become almost a decade later. The bill would create a national worker identification registry; Biden voted to kill an Abraham-Feingold amendment that would have replaced the registry with stronger enforcement. According to an analysis by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the underlying bill would have required "states to place Social Security numbers on drivers licenses and to obtain fingerprints or some other form of biometric identification for licenses."

Along with most of his colleagues in the Congress -- including Sen. John McCain but not Rep. Ron Paul -- Biden voted for the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act (which was part of a larger spending bill). Obama voted for the bill containing the Real ID Act, but wasn't in the U.S. Senate in 2001 when the original Patriot Act vote took place.

So, if Joe Biden (the Vice President of the United States and long time Democrat) was creating legislation that was very similar to legislation you hate (before there was an excuse for it) what does that tell you about the Democrats or the President of the United States?

You pick one conservative and that shows a majority of conservatives didn't support all of those things??  Somewhere on the order of 75% of conservatives supported the Iraq war.  I would venture to say that support for the other measures was in the same ballpark.