Immigration chaos: The constitutional crisis of local officials ignoring federal law. Plus, generational strife; energy realities.
By Gary Abernathy
Decades of ignoring illegal immigration has led to the chaos we see today, and it won’t be easy to hit reset
For too long — far predating the Biden administration or even the Obama administration, and occurring during Republican administrations too — the United States government has largely turned a blind eye to the throngs of illegal immigrants crossing into the U.S. and planting roots here. But Joe Biden allowed it to progress to an unforgivable degree, virtually ignoring the mass arrivals until his final year in office when, for campaign purposes, he halfheartedly tried to stem the tide.
The inevitable result of this lawlessness is being manifested in the turmoil we see today in Los Angeles and other cities.
Donald Trump is the first president to tackle the problem head-on, as it should have been tackled decades ago. A no-tolerance policy toward illegal immigration has long been needed. The cheap labor available courtesy of illegal immigrants is one reason many businesses and other employers did not complain about the flood of illegals crossing the southern border. But as more and more illegal migrant families put down roots here, the more home bases were created for other illegals to recognize as places welcoming them with open arms.
The result is what we see today — protests and riots happening in response to the sudden enforcement of immigration laws, with Mexican and other flags proudly being flown by those who have never assimilated into the culture, still identifying with their homelands and defending their turf as though it now belongs to them.
The far-left (formerly mainstream) media almost never makes the crucial distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. They prefer to say that “migrant communities” are under attack. Their one-sided narratives highlight various individuals and the fear they’re experiencing. This is indeed very, very sad. But it’s the result of coming to the country illegally and living here illegally for many years. It was a choice, and the result of such choices — whether made originally for economic or other “good” reasons — can be very sad. There are legal ways to come to the U.S. Making the choice to come here in illegal ways is now resulting in tragic consequences for many people and families.
Illegal immigrants can hardly be blamed for feeling a sense of ownership of their little corner of the U.S. Local and state governments in places like California as a whole have long made illegal immigrants feel welcome. Nonsensical “sanctuary cities” have offered the illusion of a safe haven. And yet, the illegal status of such people has prevented them from fully assimilating into society, or encouraged them to learn the English language, or enabled them to become American citizens. It’s why LEGAL immigration and the requirement to follow that path is so vital to a unified and peaceful nation.
For decades, in the name of “diversity,” we have not only tolerated new residents holding fast to their home cultures, we have encouraged it. I wrote about this recently, pointing out that diversity is actually our greatest challenge, not our greatest strength as too many politicians like to say.
The long-predicted “constitutional crisis” has arrived, not because of President Trump upholding the law of the land, but because of local mayors and governors who are attempting to make their own laws, or ignore federal authorities, or treat the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency as an invading force rather than the duly-authorized federal law enforcement agency it is.
It’s hard for me to call what’s happening an insurrection. An insurrection is typically staged by a country’s own citizens against the government. These are largely not citizens staging this uprising. This is more like an invading outside force that has been amassing here from other countries for decades, having achieved sufficient numbers now to make it difficult for authorities to control the situation.
The Democrats who are rallying with the illegal aliens are firmly positioning themselves for all posterity as standing with non-citizens, lawbreakers, protesters and rioters — as sympathetic as many of the illegals might be (they cannot fully be blamed for taking advantage of unenforced laws that our authorities have long chosen to ignore). Please spare us the mantra that the protests are “largely peaceful.” One burning car, one business with shattered windows, one police officer or soldier hit with a rock, redefines “peaceful protest” into something not peaceful.
Unless officials like California Gov. Gavin Newsom or L.A. Mayor Karen Bass do an about-face and begin enforcing the laws — very unlikely — this situation will not end quietly.
We were told for years that the southern border could not really be controlled, until Trump became president in January and suddenly controlled it. Trump has no choice now but to follow through on the crackdown that he has begun. It is clearly within his authority to call in the military if needed to quell violent uprisings or the takeover of entire neighborhoods by illegal immigrants.
To call what has happened in recent decades — millions of unvetted people from other countries pouring into the U.S. — an invasion is not an exaggeration. The president of the United States has a duty to respond — a duty too long ignored by previous presidents.
We should all welcome legal immigration. We are indeed a nation of immigrants. But our government has a responsibility to control the flow of immigrants in an orderly fashion and carefully vet those who wish to become citizens of the U.S. The failure to do so has resulted in the chaos and the constitutional crisis we see unfolding today.
Focusing on ‘Boomers,’ ‘Gen Z,’ ‘Millennials,’ etc. further divides, stereotypes and offers people more excuses
There seems to be an increasing flood of stories highlighting the so-called different generations, with more stories than ever about “Gen Z” vs. “Millennials” and, of course, everybody vs. “Boomers.”
Naturally, there has always been the “generation gap” that leads older people to complain about the younger generation, or younger people to complain about the attitudes of their parents or grandparents. There’s always been the “older generation” and the “younger generation,” with each group complaining about the others. That is normal and will always be with us.
What’s different is how social scientists a while back attempted to completely define us by our generations, and define new groups based on birth dates, as though we’re from different planets. As if we aren’t divided enough — by gender, by race, by religion, etc. — some think it’s important to divide us by the very few years that really serve to divide anyone alive today.
Stories typically focus on how the various generations feel about the country, or their jobs, or religion, or family. Here’s an excerpt from a recent typical story, this one from Newsweek:
Gen Z really prioritizes a certain compatibility factor when it comes to dating, a new study has revealed. The generation born between 1997 and 2012 stands apart from older generations in the dating landscape, exhibiting a higher concern for political alignment in potential partners, according to a study from eHarmony. This shift suggests that for many young adults, political views are not a preference, but a fundamental compatibility factor.
Guess what? Many “Boomers” also consider political alignment important or even crucial in relationships. So do “Millennials” and every other age range. It’s common sense. But here’s a way to do a needless study to try to highlight a difference.
Here’s what an AI overview program tells us about the definitions of different age groups:
Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964): Born during the post-WWII baby boom, they were shaped by events like the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement and are often associated with hard work and optimism.
Generation X (Gen X, born 1965-1980): Growing up during a time of societal changes, they are characterized by independence and resourcefulness. They experienced the rise of the internet in their later years.
Millennials (Generation Y, born 1981-1996): Coming of age during rapid technological change, they are often described as tech-savvy, collaborative, and socially conscious.
Generation Z (Gen Z, born 1997-2012): The first true digital native generation, known for their entrepreneurial spirit and awareness of social issues.
Generation Alpha (Gen Alpha, born 2013-Present): The newest generation, growing up in a highly digital and interconnected world.
Baby Boomers are associated with “hard work and optimism?” Guess what — so are a lot of Gen Z’ers.
Gen X is “characterized by independence and resourcefulness” and “experienced the rise of the internet?” People from all generations are independent and resourceful, and everyone alive before the internet (including Boomers) experienced the rise of the internet.
Millennials are “tech-savvy” and “socially conscious?” So are a lot of Gen X’ers and Baby Boomers.
To its credit, the AI program I consulted added this: “It's important to note that these are generalizations, and individuals within each generation are diverse. Generations provide a framework for understanding broad trends but should not be used to stereotype individuals.”
I push back even on the notion that generations “provide a framework for understanding broad trends.” Here’s a fact: Every individual is unique. No one is a prisoner to his or her generation or in lockstep with his or her generational contemporaries. No one should allow themselves to be painted with such a broad brush, as in, “Oh, you’re part of Gen Z, that’s why you care about climate change” or whatever the cause of the moment may be.
I don’t know who earned the privilege of putting themselves in charge of dividing the generations, naming them, and deciding what range of years defined what generations. But this was apparently a very important and influential person.
In a world where we’re warned against stereotyping people based on generalizations, we’re inundated with studies and stories doing exactly that, based on which generation someone has lumped us in.
Here’s the generation we’re all a part of: Every adult alive today.
Consider how we look at historic figures from the past. The oldest signer of the Declaration of Independence was Benjamin Franklin, age 70. The youngest signer was Edward Rutledge, 26. And yet, outside of dedicated historians, the average person today looks at the signatures on that document and thinks of them as all part of the same period in time — the Revolutionary period when America declared its independence.
A century or so from now, when sports fans look back on, say, the NBA, they’re likely to look at players like Bob Cousy, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, LeBron James and Luka Doncic as all having played at roughly the same time, back before the 12-foot rim or the 150-foot court (today’s rim is 10 feet high, and the court is 94 feet long, dimensions likely to be adjusted within the next hundred years).
When we visit old graveyards and see people who died in the 1800s, how many of us mentally make a distinction between someone who died in 1835 or in 1875? They all died a long, long time ago, all in the 19th century and, in our minds, lived in a common society.
Most people alive today share a lot more than we don’t share. Whether you’re 75 or 25, we’re using similar smart phones or laptops. We’re watching news and entertainment on similar televisions. We’re driving similar automobiles, reclining on similar furniture. We’re cooking on similar appliances. Believe it or not, we’re wearing similar clothes, even considering variations in style — they’ll all seem quite alike by those who look back from the perspective of future generations, compared to the styles and technologies that will exist in a hundred years.
This might all seem harmless enough, except it’s not. MSN has a feature on “17 Reasons Why So Many Feel Resentment Toward Boomers.” Newsweek will tell us all about how a “Millennial Has Theory for Why Boomers Are 'Mad' at Younger Generations.” Yahoo explains “13 Reasons Gen X Feels Like The Forgotten Generation.” Outside magazine tells us, “I’m Worried That My Gen Z Employees Don’t Work Hard Enough.” And on and on.
Such thinking not only pits generations against each other, it offers individuals a ready excuse to blame for their lot in life and how it’s all just the fault of how their generations are perceived.
“Boohoo, no one respects me because I’m a Boomer.”
“It’s not fair, I didn’t get hired because they think my Gen Z generation is lazy.”
“Woe is me, no one cares about me because us Gen X’ers are forgotten.”
Good advice for today’s generation (reminder, that’s all adults alive today): Don’t allow yourself to be defined by how others would define you based on your age or what they call your generational traits. Take responsibility for yourself, and make your own way — and go against the stereotype of your supposed generational category every chance you get.
Thankfully, natural gas projects are seeing new life
In my latest column for The Empowerment Alliance, I celebrate the fact that two natural gas pipeline from Pennsylvania to New York, once assumed to be dead, have new life thanks to energy-friendly policies emerging on both the federal and state levels.
I write:
Among the natural gas pipeline projects that ground to a halt were the Constitution and the Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) pipelines, both designed to transport natural gas to New York. Activists agitated against the projects, often centering their arguments on supposed clean water concerns and the alleged dangers of fracking. Even though the fracking was happening in Pennsylvania – and the projects had received approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission – New York state officials ultimately caved to the pressure from the far left and denied permits.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) was a leader among the anti-pipeline forces. In 2019, Cuomo had “signed into law the state’s goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050,” as NPR previously reported. Of the pipeline efforts, Cuomo pledged that “any way that we can challenge it, we will.”
But now, thanks to the Trump administration and a softer tone even from New York officials who are starting to admit reality due to gas shortages, things are back on track.
But there’s renewed hope for New York and the surrounding region. Because of the Trump administration’s posture favoring traditional energy sources, the Williams Companies – owners of the Constitution and NESE pipeline projects – announced in late May that they are working with government officials to revive both projects.
The news came after some savvy maneuvering by U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and a less severe attitude by current Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul. Burgum had issued a stop-work order on an off-shore wind project near New York. He lifted that order last month – a move that Hochul requested – saying he was encouraged that Hochul “will allow new gas pipeline capacity to move forward,” according to Reuters.
You can read it all here.
Random thoughts on this and that…
Terry Moran firing. I don’t find it particularly gratifying that Terry Moran lost his job at ABC News after an online rant against Donald Trump and Stephen Miller. ABC put out a statement saying that Moran violated its principles because “ABC News stands for objectivity and impartiality in its news coverage…” This is laugh-out-loud funny. Moran’s sentiments almost assuredly represent the views of most reporters who work at the far-left (formerly mainstream) outlets. To be more honest, ABC should just admit its bias, pat Moran on the back, and carry on with its typical mission of being a branch of the Democratic National Committee. …
If they’re always wrong, are they experts? Since Donald Trump took office in January, the media has gone overboard quoting “experts” about how bad his economic plans and tariffs will be for the economy, and will actually make inflation worse. Expert after expert has been wrong, and then wrong again. This headline from the New York Times this week: “U.S. Inflation Remains Muted, With Limited Effects From Tariffs.” That’s why we don’t believe “experts,” and we also don’t put much stock in…
Scholars, who are also wrong. Another NYT headline: “Trump Declares Dubious Emergencies to Amass Power, Scholars Say.” In fact, Trump’s powers when it comes to calling out the troops to protect U.S. soil and keep the peace are pretty well established, and the “scholars” quoted by the far-left (formerly mainstream) media are usually as wrong as the “experts” talking about the economy.
‘MAGA Republicans Are Already Normal’ — for yourself or for that friend or loved one who can’t fathom Trump
“MAGA Republicans Are Already Normal — And Other Shocking Notions” is a great addition to the library of MAGA Trump supporters, or the perfect gift for non-MAGA friends and loved ones to help them make sense of the 2024 election results. It’s available on Amazon. Buy it here.
The book (actually much thicker than the illustrations above indicate — the hardcover and paperback are each 453 pages) is a compilation of many of the nearly 200 columns I wrote for the Washington Post from 2017 to 2023 (and a handful of columns I wrote about Trump for The (Hillsboro) Times-Gazette from 2015 to 2017). The columns cover a variety of topics, but they particularly focus on Trump’s rise to political prominence and help explain his appeal.
Here’s a link to a website dedicated to the book.
Sign up or share this newsletter
Please sign up to receive this newsletter directly into your inbox or, if you are already a subscriber and reading this by email, share with a friend using the convenient button below. Thank you!