Indeed.... And I've gotta love my Master's Degree being "poorly educated" meanwhile he makes the most ridiculous assertions ever and doesn't provide any citation and he's apparently the bee's knees.
And on being an "HR Professional" - that was my career, as well as my education path which includes a Master's Degree. "Professional - n. a person competent or skilled in a particular activity." And I specialized in opening stores, it's a well paying career path, made more doing it than I made hiring office workers for Verizon when I first came out of college by far. (almost $10k more before bonuses, about $30k most years counting bonuses plus I gave me an excuse to see different areas that I enjoyed) But I guess because I managed staffing for 10k+ sq foot groceries with 200-400 staff per location that was frowned upon. [I'll admit it's not the most prestigious HR position, but it's one of the better ways to apply the degree]
Pretty sure a Master's Degree program in HR is more than enough to qualify as a professional being that it's the highest degree I'm aware of for the field.
And on "living off the taxpayer" - I pay quite a bit in taxes on my trust, and I've still got another 13 years before I'll have taken back every dollar that I paid in via my FICA assuming that wasn't defraying anything. And not at any point have I lied about one ounce of my life story. (Plenty of people disbelieve it and I don't care to be bothered by it so I've stepped back from that stuff however)
On "pretending to know the law" - I was reciting after reading an article on the matter. I wasn't 100% sure, I looked it up and that was the explicit specifics. This isn't the one I used before but it's even better than that one it looks:
John Carter says Constitution gives Congress sway over immigration policy so Obama lacked authority to defer deportations of young illegal immigrants | PolitiFact Texas
In telephone interviews, lawyers versed in the Constitution and U.S. immigration laws told us that while there is no explicit language in the Constitution saying immigration policy shall be set by Congress, Article I, Section 8 has long been interpreted as giving Congress that role. The fourth clause of the section says Congress shall have the power to establish a uniform "Rule of Naturalization," as in determining who can legally be in the country.
Merlin was saying it was given to Congress in the Constitution which is false - they're given the ability to determine naturalization which isn't precisely the same thing, the SC has decided they're close enough however. But it's not because it's in the Constitution.
PS - Who's really the mad one? Going through a month worth of my history to quote stuff at me? LOL.
And on my own life, it does mostly suck - I'm generally unhappy, part of why I try to make the world a better place rather than focusing on my own life and health problems I can do little for.