Final update, just in: Maybe the spectre of public shame in the midst of a PR campaign trying to sell us on what a great corporate citizen AIG really is made a difference, the board has declined to pursue a lawsuit against the US government bailout that saved them. Even the Wall Street journal had a hard time believing they would.
Update 1/9/2013 10 PM Central: I’ve already seen some anecdotal evidence that a faction of the dumbest mushroom conservatives are drawn inexorably to defend AIG — when informed of the basic facts they know intellectually it’s a bad idea to take AIG’s side, but they just can’t seem help themselves, they keep getting pulled back to insanity, as long as the government is being sued and it involves the word bailout. If the AIG board is dumb enough to decide to try and sue us today, my spidey sense is screaming this could blow up into a great wedge issue.
Hell hath no fury like a company that is too big to fail and American International Group, the largest insurance company in the world, is proving it by considering a suit against We the People for saving their worthless ass. Let’s be clear: AIG wasn’t merely a victim of the 2008 meltdown, its financial products division was the primary architect of the derivatives and virtual exchange that caused the collapse. After destroying the world economy and throwing millions of lives into chaos, the board is now considering a $25 billion suit against the US government that saved it:
Atlantic — It’s not so much that AIG’s mad the government bailed them out. (They wouldn’t be around to be mad if it hadn’t.) They just wish they’d done it a little bit differently.
“The lawsuit does not argue that government help was not needed,” The New York Times reports. “It contends that the onerous nature of the rescue — the taking of what became a 92 percent stake in the company, the deal’s high interest rates and the funneling of billions to the insurer’s Wall Street clients — deprived shareholders of tens of billions of dollars and violated the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits the taking of private property for ‘public use, without just compensation.'” Does that kind of bad attitude count as “looking the gift horse in the mouth” or “biting the hand that feeds you?” Or both?
It counts as one of the worst PR moves since New Coke. AIG just started running commercials thanking us for the bailout and acting halfway human, now this. It’s a hopeless lawsuit and a terrible PR move, so piss poor it’s utterly incomprehensible. Really, it’s difficult to imagine what kind of greedy social retards would think that up or how the most sycophantic yesmen could go along, but for crying out loud, fire them all, publicly and immediately you fucking ignoramuses, fire them without pay or benefits or golden parachutes starting with the giant prick of a CEO Robert Benmosche.