Racism and sexism are alive and well at the Washington Post.  The WaPo showed a photo of Trump's Cabinet debating the issue of illegal immigration and was offended by how many white men there were.  In an article offensively entitled "To solve his immigration crisis, Trump turns to a table of white men," the anti-white writer Eugene Scott wrote:

The optics of having all white men, most of them older, making decisions  about populations they are not part of reinforces some of the largest concerns people of color have had about this administration.

Is it harsh for me to label Eugene Scott, the author of this article, as anti-white?  What if Eugene Scott had written this instead?

The optics of having all black women, most of them older, making decisions  about populations they are not part of reinforces some of the largest concerns white men have had about this administration.

Wouldn't Scott have been labeled racist and sexist for writing such a sentence?  Well, if that's racist, then both passages must be.

Scott continues his racist diatribe, claiming that only Hispanics, by virtue of their skin color, can understand what is happening with illegal immigration:

There are several Latino Republicans in Congress who represent districts that give them deep knowledge about the immigrant stories we see coming from the border.

Really? What about white ranchers who live near the border, whose property is constantly violated by illegal aliens?  Don't they too have "deep knowledge" of what goes on at the border?  Or are their stories invalid because they are white?

If the president is truly interested in hearing the concerns of those his policies impact most, a start would be to, at the very least, include them in the conversation. Their absence speaks volumes and gives the impression that people most like Trump are the ones who matter most to him.

Trump = racist.  This from a writer who is offended by a photo of white men sitting around a table. (One of them was actually a woman, Kirstjen Nielsen, but women apparently don't have as much virtue as people of color.)

The WaPo is never concerned about photos that show nearly everyone as being black, such as sports teams – only about photos where most people are white.  It's a specific kind of racism, and it's consistently directed against white people.  The WaPo and the rest of the liberal media are bold and upfront about it because they don't believe it's possible to be racist against white people.

Only if many people speak out against them will they eventually be shamed.  Just as the cry of "fake news" has caused the media to lose some of their luster, repeated cries of "racist news" and "anti-white news" might eventually shame the media into being a little more circumspect with their anti-Caucasian tendencies.

By the way, when I look at the photo of Trump and his advisers, I never paid attention to their skin color.  I just wondered, "Who are they, and what is their ideology?"  But that under-the-skin analysis would never occur to the anti-white supremacists at the Washington Post.

Ed Straker is the senior writer at Newsmachete.com.