Does alcoholism explain Eliot Spitzer’s poor judgment?
My readers know that misbehaviors frequently serve as indications of an underlying alcohol or other-drug addiction. Unfortunately, since addictive use is often hidden from pubic view by enablers, behaviors may be the only clues. This is especially true among politicians, CEOs, doctors, lawyers and other professionals.
Yet, most celebrities and professional athletes who misbehave in similar ways are almost always “outed” by journalists. The fact that such behaviors in celebrities who are known alcoholics are roughly identical to those in politicians, etc., in whom the heavy drinking is never reported is damning evidence that alcoholism is the driving force in both. When we understand that addiction causes both egomania, which impels the addict to wield power over others capriciously, along with distortions of perception that can result in behaviors best described as bizarre, we can ascribe a high probability that hidden alcoholism exists.
Eliot Spitzer is one of the many top law enforcers on my “watch” list. The key hallmark of hidden early-stage alcoholism, egomania, has been evident for years. I first wrote about him in the “under watch” section of the http://www.addictionreport.com May 2005 issue:
“New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, publicly airing charges of fraud by former AIG CEO Maurice ‘Hank’ Greenberg, not only before charges have been brought, but also before the investigation is even finished (reminiscent of alcoholic Senator Joe McCarthy’s false accusations in an era of McCarthyism). (By the way, any improper accounting would have inflated AIG’s reserves by all of 1-3%, which is often considered “de minimus,” or irrelevant, by accountants.)”
This was followed by a comment in the same section of the July 2005 issue:
“New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, finally confronted in the courtroom by one of his business targets, former Bank of America broker Theodore Sihpol, in a match reminiscent of David and Goliath. The jury found Sihpol’s after-market-close trading, which Mr. Spitzer called criminal, to be commonly accepted practice. Sihpol was acquitted on 29 counts, with the jury hung on four others, for which a single juror held out for conviction. Sihpol had refused a plea offer that included jail time, putting himself at risk for a 30-year term. Other business targets have caved into Spitzer’s prosecution-by-press-release and threats of indictment or the destruction of an entire company, paying enormous fines (often with shareholder funds). None had previously risked a trial.”
He made the “under watch” section again in November 2005:
“New York Attorney General Elliott Spitzer, who continues to devote multiple lawyers to his case against the New York Stock Exchange over former Exchange President Dick Grasso’s compensation package, while claiming his office is too low on funds to pursue Medicaid fraud (Medicaid consumes $40 billion yearly in New York). One of the directors of the Exchange compensation committee, Ken Langone, explains that if his office prevails (which it likely won’t), the damages would be handed back to the owners of the Stock Exchange, ‘millionaires one and all”myself included.’ Langone, who was smeared by Spitzer as ‘unsavory’ and ‘deceptive,’ and whose heart Spitzer pledged to ‘put a stake through,’ points out that Spitzer has a ‘troubling method of making loud legal threats, strong-arming witnesses, and intimidating boards and companies into destructive concessions.’ The use of hyperbole, intimidating others and the need to destroy worthy people are superb behavioral indications of alcoholism.”
I compared Spitzer with District Attorney Mike Nifong, who made false accusations of rape against three Duke University students, in the April-May 2006 issue:
“The grandstanding D.A. announced he was having DNA collected from all the players and boldly predicted the test results would identify the guilty. Although there was no match to the clothing or body of the accuser, the arrests were made. (Some of the victim’s defenders suggest that the rapists all wore condoms. Sure, drunk young men always put on condoms before committing rape.) Nifong appeared to have learned a thing or two from New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer when he told reporters that he was not dissuaded from the negative test results and said ‘I believe a sexual assault took place.’ Forget about the idea that justice requires that the accused be presumed innocent until proven guilty, even by a top law enforcer who happened to be campaigning for reelection. (And in whom political behaviors may be indistinguishable from alcoholic ones.) ”
Eliot Spitzer has repeatedly displayed signs of alcoholism by abusing his power. Spitzer, a married man with three teenage children, has done something that some might describe as bizarre or just plain stupid by paying thousands of dollars for a hooker. Recovering addicts admit that adultery, including the use of prostitutes, is the norm in many addict’s lives. They tell us they vowed they’d never do “it” again, whatever “it” was, but began drinking and “it” happened again and again. As usual, we’ll give Mr. Spitzer the benefit of the doubt: he got drunk and made false accusations. He got drunk and decided to inflate his ego by going after innocent people. He got drunk and displayed an inordinately large sense of self-importance by santimoniously telling others they will pay dearly by violating the law. He got drunk and paid for hooker, in violation of both the law and his marriage contract. Alcoholism is the by far the best explanation for Eliot Spitzer’s megalomania and, now, gross stupidity. It doesn’t excuse his behaviors, but it does explain them. And it points to the solution.