And, prey tell what is an intellectual vs a psudointellectual, in your mind?
Curiosity responds:
A pseudointellectual is one who attempts to sound erudite and knowledgeable on a subject yet in fact does not have anything of substance to say.
An intellectual is one who is genuinely learned and can make subtle, relevent, and intelligent arguments.
Your post that another freeper labeled as pseudointellectual, was, I believe, labeled acurately.
You attempted to justify the president's neglect of illegal immigration by claiming that he has in fact restricted immigration of potentially dangerous persons and only neglected the influx of low-priority non-criminal illegal aliens laborers. You attempted to make your opinion sound erudite by citing several facts that, while interesting, are largely irrelevent. Furthermore, as cripplecreek points out, your argument also ignores the obvious fact that without checking the backgrounds of the masses sneaking accross the southern border, we have no way of telling whether they are dangerous terrorists or relatively harmless laborers, exposing the lack of substance in your seemingly erudite post.
So yes, your post does fit quite nicely the classic definition of pseudointellectual: seemingly erudite yet at the same time vacuous.
I have all the credentials to be called an top-flight intellectual. So you don't know one when you see one. You are probably mostly threatened by someone who can express herself with a good vocabulary.
However, I am not an expert on this subject, I am just discussing the news. I was not arguing that border enforcement is perfect, now. I know it is not. Having said that, all that I can say about your two points is that you haven't made any friends, today.