I haven’t really looked this morning but I assume others are already saying what I’ve been ruminating since I heard about the Steve McNair shooting. So let me say it now—I don’t think this is going to end well for McNair’s reputation.
After the news broke yesterday, ESPN radio was filled with people commenting on what a great guy McNair was. Steve’s brother, Fred, commented, “It’s still kind of hard to believe. He was the greatest person in the world. He gave back to the community. He loved kids and he wanted to be a role model to kids.”
All of which may be true. But I’ve become so jaded and cynical on celebrity deaths there’s simply no way for me to look at the facts as they’ve been presented so far and not conclude McNair was having an affair with the 20 year old Sahel Kazemi.

Here’s what we’ve been told so far: McNair and Kazemi knew each other from a restaurant the quarterback and his family frequented. There is a 2007 Cadillac Escalade registered to Kazemi AND McNair. Witnesses say McNair arrived at a condominium he owns between 1:30 and 2:00 am Saturday. They say Kazemi was already at the condo.
Those facts alone would put most marriages in serious jeopardy.
Hey, maybe Steve and Shahel were planning the church bazaar. There are as many acceptable scenarios as there are illicit scenarios.
McNair, though, was discovered with multiple gunshot wounds, one to head. Kazemi had been shot once.
Multiple gunshot wounds sounds like a crime of passion to me. If you’re stealing a DVD player and the family penny jar, you don’t inflict multiple gunshot wounds—you fire once or twice and flee.
Eddie George, the former Tennessee Titans running back, played with McNair and spoke on ESPN radio yesterday. He was filled with praise for McNair and the way he lived his life. I simply felt bad for Eddie. I wondered how he will feel if the foreshadowed circumstances come to fruition.
Am I bad person to think like this? In the middle of one family’s tragedy all I can do is imagine the consequences of purely hypothetical and tawdry events.
Adding to my self-loathing was my contempt for those who called, emailed and texted the ESPN radio host. Fans poured out the grief: “We’ll never forget Steve.” “This is such a sad loss for America.” “I’m devastated.”
Really? This is a guy who played football. If he hadn’t been a professional athlete we never would have heard of him. America’s fascination with playing the role of the drama queen is well documented. “How will we go on without Michael Jackson?” (Woe is me.) You’ll buy someone else’s music.
ESPN’s radio host at least had the most relevant reason to grieve—a 36 old man was shot to death. That is too young to die. Indeed it is. But I’m sorry, 36 year old black men are shot in this country by the dozen and there’s little outrage. The feigned grief over McNair’s soon-to-come-to-light Shakespearean ending is hypocritical–unless you want to use him as a public face for a national tragedy.
McNair’s death IS sad. But it’s not EXTRA sad because he was famous. WE are EXTRA sad because we apparently place more value on the life of the famous Steve McNair than on Laquinn Tucker, a 37-year-old black man, who was shot several times and died June 5.; or Steve Moore, a 39-year-old black man who was stabbed in the chest and died June 2; or Perry Wilson, a 36-year-old black man who was shot and died June 20.
The sad part is that, if my cynical, jaded prediction is correct, McNair’s actions will have brought about an extreme over-reaction from someone. He will have been in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong person. He will have fooled his family and friends. These are all very sad events.
I feel bad that I think like this, but honestly I don’t know how any relatively well-informed American could conclude otherwise, Truly, I hope I’m wrong. But aren’t we ALL sitting around today waiting for the other shoe to drop?
But let’s not make more of his death than it really is. One man. One sad story. One death. Let’s hide our hypocrisy and keep our self-indulgent grief to ourselves.
-
1
Pingback on Jul 5th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
[...] post: Steve McNair: Bad News and Self-Indulgent Grief Tags: democrats, hillary-clinton, obama, republican, speechPosted in Micheal Jackson Died | [...]








But on the more important substantive issues, it was full of contradictions and misleading statements. He talked about being knocked down as a child and how his mother taught him to pick himself up. (Great lesson) Later, though, he lamented that at a time when so many Americans have been knocked down, Washington has done so little to help them get back up. (I thought, Senator, the point was to learn to pick YOURSELF up.)
He talked about how the most important aspect of work is that it provides the benefit of dignity and respect to Americans; but he then prattled on about how the work people have doesn't pay enough.
He talked about how tax breaks for corporations, which McCain supports, send jobs overseas. No, Joe, they don't. Tax breaks for corporations brings jobs home; companies have been sending jobs overseas because it already costs TOO MUCH to do business within the US.
He talked about a "promise that their tomorrow will be better than their yesterday." Who is making that promise, Senator? Only we can make our tomorrow better. Government can't and if government is promising that, and Americans want that, then this is the discussion that we should be having in America.
He quoted John McCain on Afghanistan from 3 years ago and Barack Obama on Afghanistan from 1 year ago. Why not break out a quote from McCain on Georgia from years ago and a quote from Obama on Georgia from last week?
Viewers of this speech who pay attention to his words, will not have been impressed with the content or the medium.
However, the speech itself probably did little. She certainly had nothing to say that might sway Republicans to rethink their party affiliation. Furthermore, absent too were talking points that independents might find attractive. The speech seemed to have two purposes. First, convince her supporters to vote for Obama. But who else were they going to vote for? Those people involved enough in politics to be at or watch on tv the DNC convention are also likely to be people who will value their vote and not stay at home. Those who might elect not to vote at all, certainly were not in attendance and might well have been watching America's Got Talent and missed the speech completely.
Secondly, and more importantly to Mrs. Clinton, the speech was littered with reminders of why she should remain relevant in the Democratic Party. This was a "You Picked the Wrong Guy" speech.
Will we remember her or this speech in 4 or 8 years? I suspect not. The speech didn't brand itself with any tag lines that might survive the next few years. But it was a hell of an effort.
I believe not attending to these differences is the cause of the apparent divide in American thought. True conservatism (not that practiced by the Republicans) understands the importance of relationships between people and values those relationships over the individual. The whole is indeed greater than the sum of the parts. Liberal ideology seeks to raise the needs and desires of the individual above the collective good. This is where the Libertarians lose most Americans. Intuitively, Americans sense the error of the "my liberty is more important than the collective good" ethos and shun the movement. Neither the modern Democratic Party nor the Republican Party has found a way to tap into the American belief in Freedom while simultaneously bonding us to society. This is the time for Democratic and Republican ideologies to be replaced by less "me" centered thinking and our nation should return to its ideological roots, which means that we understand our obligation to each other to value and defend each other's freedom, not just our own.
The Democratic support that the super delegates are so keen on being a part of should be viewed as something of a mirage. What would the delegate count be if the events of the last month had taken place in December? Would Obama have as much support as he does now? Would he be the presumed candidate? And yet the Obama of today is the one the Democrats are likely to insist represents their party. The Obama that sees middle America as "clingers," the Obama that wouldn't repudiate Wright but is now quite right to repudiate, this is the Obama that will face McCain in November. For a party as down on America as this one, an Obama nomination seems awfully optimistic. Perhaps, it's not just Michigan and Florida that need a do-over: perhaps the Democrats ought to have a national do-over.
Sure he's liberal. Liberal we can handle. Heck even socialist we can handle. We have systems in place to deal with presidential initiatives which we ultimately don't approve of. But relinquishing any control to any kind of world organization is very troubling. Being outside of our borders and constitution, we could find ourselves subject to a body we don't agree with and yet have few ways to get out from under its jurisdiction. This is a slippery slope. I fear Obama's need to be liked and validated will prompt him to try to enter the U.S. into many global initiatives.
I'm afraid I just don't believe that her feelings are the result of poorly timed contemplation. My understanding is that the family was present for the photo shoot and got to see the picture in advance. They liked it and moved on. NOW all of a sudden Miley is embarrassed? These are smart people familiar with the media. I, of course, have no inside information, this is just my opinion, but it would appear she wants to have her cake and eat it too: do the photo shoot (be edgy, become known to new demographics) and then make a heartfelt apology to appease the core fan group.
Is Obama smart enough to see the error of his proposal to meet with such foreign leaders? Probably not. Too impressed with his own palaver, he'll stand by his words. But can McCain and the GOP make the same connection and exploit Carter's follies as empirical evidence that they were correct in postulating what such visits from US dignitaries would bring about?
His words address the inherently conservative values (not republican--conservative) most Americans believe in. But he also points out that while we believe in them, we don't LIVE them. His article can be, and should be, a call for personal change. It will be an exciting read for the number of times you exclaim (too loudly for those sipping coffee nearby) "Yes!" Although, if I'm honest, it is depressing on a national scale because I know most Americans act on their immediate desires and not on the values they hold most sacred. But, in the end, change starts at home.
October 29, 2009 at 2:54 am
Hey i didnt even know steve mcnair had been murdered, in my eyes he was a good football player as well as person but my dad was my dad so i have nothin more to say about it…..thanks for acknowledging those who passed on in june.