Why Is Michael Mulgrew Leading The Attacks Against Eliot Spitzer?

UFT President Michael Mulgrew seems to have a personal vendetta against former governor Eliot Spitzer.

When Spitzer announced his candidacy for New York City comptroller late Sunday night, Mulgrew immediately sprung into action to try and destroy Spitzer's fledgling campaign.

First, Mulgrew told the NY Times that he had put "all options" on the table to deal with Spitzer and he was considering using the UFT's campaign funds to run TV ads against him.

Today the NY Post reports that Spitzer, desperate to get the necessary signatures to get on the ballot by Thursday, reached out to one of the few firms that does petitioning work and got a preliminary agreement from them to join his campaign, but Mulgrew pulled strings with the firm (Red Horse Strategies) and got them to leave Spitzer in the lurch.

Now I know that Spitzer's candidacy has upset many power brokers and their functionaries here in NYC, from Kathryn Wilde, head of the corporate criminal lobbying group New York City Partnership, to the editorial staffs and neo-liberal columnist contingents at the Times, Daily News, and Post, but Mulgrew seems particularly incensed at Spitzer's candidacy.

Sure, Mulgrew and his merry men and women in the Unity/New Action leadership will say this is about making sure they get their guy, Scott Stringer, elected comptroller, but the truth is, what's so special about Stringer?

Frankly, he's a pedestrian political hack who only joined the comptroller's race after it became apparent he couldn't get elected mayor and he dropped out of that race.

As Jonathan Tasini noted in a blogpost:

Stringer, on the other hand, is an unqualified hack. He runs for this position simply because he’s out of job and can’t fathom the idea of having to look for a job outside of politics. He views the comptroller position as a nice place to sit for four or eight years until he can try, god help the city, to run for mayor.

To say he’s a narcissist isn’t really a mark against him in politics. But, worse, he’s a narcissist with a dull mind, which is even worse because people of that ilk think the world revolves around them but they can’t at least return some value for that self-centeredness. One wishes the transcribers of press releases would challenge his supporters to name a single instance — just one — of one original idea he has had, an idea that actually went from start to finish, which took on and took down an established power. It has never happened. (In fact, as an aside, go ask the residents around Columbia University about how he went back on his word on the development around Columbia and screwed the long-time residents, opting to pimp for one of the most powerful real estate interests in the city).

Given Stringer's overall hackery, I think the working people of this city could live without a Scott Stringer comptrollership.

So why the life/death battle coming out of 52 Broadway to get Stringer elected and end Spitzer's candidacy before it even gets started?

Sure, Spitzer tried to take on the unions when he was governor, but no more than Andrew Cuomo has and quite honestly, Cuomo has been much more damaging to labor, teachers and schools then Spitzer ever was, but Mulgrew is happy to continue to back Cuomo unequivocally.

Hell, the UFT leadership weren't even this incensed at Michael Bloomberg's third term in 2009 as they seem to be at Spitzer's candidacy.

They certainly did little-to-nothing to stop Bloomberg's third term while Mulgrew is now saying "all options" are on the table to stop Spitzer.

The UFTsters may argue this is about the politics, that Stringer is a reliable ally while Spitzer is an adversary, but Cuomo and Bloomberg have been much more adversarial than Spitzer and I don't see the same kind of "all options" urgency coming out of 52 Broadway to put a stake through their political careers.

So what gives?

Why Is Michael Mulgrew so scared of Eliot Spitzer?