成人X站

Every Friday at 9 p.m, Jason Rantz and I talk to someone who has an unusual perspective, job, or life experience that may otherwise be mocked or dismissed. We give him or her a chance to be heard.

We鈥檝e called the segment “A Fair Shake.”

RELATED: Meet Seattle’s mermaids … and merman

Illegal immigration was one of the most talked about issues of the 2016 presidential campaign. It鈥檚 one of the more divisive issues in the political realm. On one side you have sanctuary cities like Seattle, and on the other, you have chants of 鈥淏uild the Wall!鈥�

The issue of legal immigration, however, is less controversial. Aside from the travel ban issued by the Trump Administration that has been repeatedly struck down in court, very few voices have called for capping the number of those emigrating to America in a lawful manner.

Colorado State University Professor is calling for just that. He is a self-proclaimed progressive who believes that LEGAL immigration is harmful to our country.

He’s a perfect guest for our segment. It鈥檚 an abnormal position for anyone to take, but especially for someone who professes to be leftist. That鈥檚 unheard of.

In his new book, 鈥淗ow Many is Too Many?鈥�, Cafaro lays out his case for reducing the number of people we allow to cross our border to make a new home. He was in town to lecture at and we had the opportunity to speak with him.

Jason and I were both skeptical of his position but allowed him to explain himself. You can listen to the interview .

His basic premise is this: The United States, from an environmental perspective, can鈥檛 supply enough resources for the population explosion that immigrants often cause. Beyond that, he also holds the belief that the migrant workforce is destroying the American middle class. He would like to see the number of people allowed into the country cut in half. At that point, Cafaro contends, the population will stabilize.

The problem with his argument is two-fold. He had no data to prove that it was immigration that has caused wages to remain stagnant. As for the environmental concerns, there were many holes in his reasoning.

Listen to the interview to hear us challenge his ideas. Perhaps you will see his point of view as valid. That’s why we do the segment.