Don Lemon is not too happy with his competitors over at MSNBC, especially Melissa Harris-Perry.  On Sunday, Perry’s MSNBC panel laughed at Mitt Romney’s family photo with his lone black grandchild.  “One of these things is not like the other,” a female guest sang as the others, including Perry, laughed.

The panel of guests, most of whom were white, ridiculed the child, saying the scene depicted that of the Republican Party. 

On Lemon’s panel, the following day, he spoke out against Harris-Perry, saying, “They used the kid to mock Mitt Romney.”

But CNN doesn’t find the situation funny. “I’m not even sure what the threshold anymore is for MSNBC going too far,” said Ana Navarro, a contributor. “I did find it in absolutely bad taste. I think there is nothing funny about adoption, regardless of the color of the baby, regardless of the color of the family. At this time of year we should be celebrating the fact that there are families all over America that open up their hearts to give love to children that need it….Speaking personally, my mother is adopted. There’s all sorts of self-esteem issues that children and adults have. I think it’s just plain old mean. It is a mean segment.”

CNN Contributor, Marc Lamont Hill, disagreed. “There is absolutely a line you shouldn’t cross. The line I think is you don’t make fun of people’s kids, you don’t make fun of people who are adopted, you don’t mock the vulnerable. They didn’t do any of those things.”

This is when Lemon intervened, saying, “But Marc, they used the kid to mock Mitt Romney.”

Marc: “We use everything to mock Mitt Romney. Mocking Mitt Romney is a sport. And everyone mocks Mitt Romney across the aisle, I don’t see anything wrong with that. They also joked about the lack of diversity in the Republican Party. They’re absolutely right about that. …We are making much ado about nothing.”

Again, Lemon intervened. “What if this was on Fox? What if this same segment was on Fox? If someone on Fox saying one of these things is not like the other to a black baby and a white family.”


Tags: , ,
Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • Open YO Eyes

    Don Lemon ain’t bout nada. A demon–period. Ever since he came out he’s been attacking blacks all over the place to gain attention (in a racist society) and to get additional white approval from what he already gained from them for his admitting he was a homosexual black man. So typical.

    Two, that black baby…that black baby has some horrible news about his adoptive grandaddy awaiting him and, uh…Melissa Perry will be nonexistent to that Black boy when he reads and hears that Mitt Romney (the devil whose lap he’s sitting on like a damn PROP) literally traveled the world for decades, TEACHING to anyone who’d listen, the cardinal erstwhile mormon tenet THAT BLACK PEOPLE WERE CURSED BY GOD (mormons call it the Curse of Cain) FOR HAVING BLACK SKIN. Romney did this for over thirty years (until they were given an ultimatum). The mormons ONLY stopped espousing this because President Carter, in the 1970s, refused to give the Mormon organization (the Church of Latter Day Saints) multi-million dollar tax incentives/cuts until they allowed blacks to join and become bishops. Pres, Carter hated that group’s overt racism, wanted this religious group to stop refusing to allowing Blacks to join. And THIS is why Mormons allow Blacks in their organization today: for money. So, uh, screw Mr. 47% and sourpuss Lemon.

    If I were Ms Perry (who’s even reported this about Romney before) I would go so hard on Romney and CNN (who’s only using that tool, Lemon-of-a-“journalist” to hit at their network competition) about Romney’s racist a**.

    Clutch readers, research, google, study, learn. Aint NOTHING Ms. Perry and her panelists did/said that’s gonna hurt that boy more than his family’s racist history. I feel sorry for him, actually. Certainly, there were better candidates to adopt him, given Mormons’ racist history. But Clutch readers’ comments on this article reflect that they think Romney’s MONEY is what will constitute wholeness in the boy. Sad. Happy New Year.

  • Anthony

    I don’t doubt the kid will have issues. At least hunger or ducking the next drive by won’t be two of them. He will also have parents, no matter how flawed they are, and that means a lot to any child.

    • Open YO Eyes

      “At least hunger or ducking the next drive by won’t be two of them.”

      Mean spirited stereotypes and negative, harsh remarks about victims of institutionalized racism (Black people) aren’t a respectable (nor highly spiritual) thing to do. And insinuating that ALL the Blacks who adopt Black babies instantaneously and automatically expose them to “hunger” and “drive bys” is utterly offensive. You a mean person, seasoned with self-hate and ignorance (if you are black) or you’re a race poser, visiting black themed sites to spew racist venom to make people feel less than. With demeanor, and attitudes about Blacks, like yours…let’s hope this black baby never crosses your path.

    • Anthony

      I was not referring to kids adopted by black families. Kids who end up in the system are the kids from backgrounds that can subject them to hunger, violence, and abuse. If they were from healthy and stable backgrounds, they would not be in the system.

    • Jane D’oh!

      you were right on point with your assessment of anthony’s ignorant comment. if it were a white baby he wouldn’t have even said that. i hate when people say ignorant, racist things and then get offended when you call them on it. i saw how he miserably tried to backtrack and explain, but no – only other ignorant people like him will try to rally around him. i read his comment exactly the way you did and his subsequent comments only proved what he said he wasn’t saying. but who cares about him – he is like a micro version of ani defranco. he doesn’t get it – he never will. it’s ingrained whether he is black or white. but forget about him and his supporters for a sec – what bothers me the most is that is this child supposed to be a BOY? I thought it was a girl. i’m not pink/blue color stuck, but why would he take a pic with this male child being the only one in a pink outfit? it is clear that the women/girls are in pink and the men/boys are in blue. i find that extremely troubling… why are they debuting this black man before the world like this?? it seems a little weird.

    • Open YO Eyes

      How about this? First, turn OFF your poisonous thought faucet. Do that first. Two, you are using a racist (self-hate included) template to [predict] a future future for the baby. And you’re insinuating that white adoptive families automatically provide better environments ONLY because they are white. And, that adoptive black families automatically expose babies to the boogieman. Whereas, in actually, that’s not true.

      And your other dumb remark: “Kids who end up in the system are the kids from backgrounds that can subject them to hunger, violence, and abuse.”

      Actually, you have no idea as to WHY this baby is available. Sometimes, babies are available for basic reasons, not because it was born in an alley under a trash can on a freezing Chicago morning. I have a friend from childhood who got pregnant in high school. That was a great family she was from, personally. Nice home etc. She, being 16, just wasn’t confident about being able to take care of the baby and her parents were older parent — and one of them had health issues. Another nice [Black] family adopted him and now both he and she (the mother) are fine.

      So, you DON’T KNOW why these babies are available. And you really don’t have to force a stereotypical Hollywood-esque Black boogieman parent thing onto something that you don’t know a damn thing about. And, we ALL know, that white families (no matter how much money they have), uhhhhhhhh, have their problems JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.


    • jesse

      maybe its me but i never saw any of what you said in Anthony’s comment, maybe just calm down for a second and re-read it

    • Anthony

      @Open Yo Eyes, show me where I said white families are automatically better or automatically provide better environments, and I will apologize.

      What I said and continue to say is that a baby with no family is worse off than a baby with a family, provided the adults in that family are stable, regardless of the color of those parents. I have never said anything more or less than that. In the case of the Romneys, they are rich, and a child in that family will have access to above average material resources. Of course, a black child brought into that family will have serious issues to work through, but that would be better than being raised in an institution. Given my cultural biases, I would have liked to have seen the child in a stable black environment, but that did not happen. If you want to make me out to be someone who hates myself or worships whites, have at it.

      Yes, Captain Obvious, I do not know the story of each baby that ends up eligible for adoption. I do have personal experience with the adoptive process, and far more children come out of troubled situations than the sort of scenarios you related in your latest post.

    • Anthony

      @Jesse, thank you for noting what I actually said. One of the most annoying things about the internet is being criticized for what some imagined I said instead of the words that actually were typed by my hands.

  • @Joe

    The radioactive bag of stress should definitely not be up there

  • choco L

    Why does Kieran have on a pink outfit..why is his name Kieran why isn’t it Josh…I dont like bi-racial adoptions…..why can’t they get their babies from the place rosie odonell gets her babies……why