![AIG may sue because bailout wasn’t a cushy enough deal. Sen. Warren is displeased.
New York Times:
Fresh from paying back a $182 billion bailout, the American International Group has been running a nationwide advertising campaign with the tagline “Thank you America.”
Behind the scenes, the restored insurance company is weighing whether to tell the government agencies that rescued it during the financial crisis: thanks, but you cheated our shareholders.
The board of A.I.G. will meet on Wednesday to consider joining a $25 billion shareholder lawsuit against the government, court records show. The lawsuit does not argue that government help was not needed. 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.”
Maurice R. Greenberg, A.I.G.’s former chief executive, who remains a major investor in the company, filed the lawsuit in 2011 on behalf of fellow shareholders. He has since urged A.I.G. to join the case, a move that could nudge the government into settlement talks.
So basically, the saved drowning victim is suing the lifeguard because the fabric on the lifepreserver gave him a rash. Boo freakin’ hoo, you whiny little dick. No one made you accept the deal.
Newly-minted Senator Elizabeth Warren released a statement:
Beginning in 2008, the federal government poured billions of dollars into AIG to save it from bankruptcy. AIG’s reckless bets nearly crashed our entire economy. Taxpayers across this country saved AIG from ruin, and it would be outrageous for this company to turn around and sue the federal government because they think the deal wasn’t generous enough. Even today, the government provides an ongoing, stealth bailout, propping up AIG with special tax breaks — tax breaks that Congress should stop. AIG should thank American taxpayers for their help, not bite the hand that fed them for helping them out in a crisis.
In other words, if AIG thinks they got too little, they’re delusional. They’re got too much and are still getting too much. Corporate welfare beggars can’t be choosers.
[image source]](http://25.media.tumblr.com/3b1c8b0f76eb1e60a5ec5bafe5214184/tumblr_mgbycsdv0S1qfengno1_1280.jpg)
AIG may sue because bailout wasn’t a cushy enough deal. Sen. Warren is displeased.
Fresh from paying back a $182 billion bailout, the American International Group has been running a nationwide advertising campaign with the tagline “Thank you America.”
Behind the scenes, the restored insurance company is weighing whether to tell the government agencies that rescued it during the financial crisis: thanks, but you cheated our shareholders.
The board of A.I.G. will meet on Wednesday to consider joining a $25 billion shareholder lawsuit against the government, court records show. The lawsuit does not argue that government help was not needed. 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.”
Maurice R. Greenberg, A.I.G.’s former chief executive, who remains a major investor in the company, filed the lawsuit in 2011 on behalf of fellow shareholders. He has since urged A.I.G. to join the case, a move that could nudge the government into settlement talks.
So basically, the saved drowning victim is suing the lifeguard because the fabric on the lifepreserver gave him a rash. Boo freakin’ hoo, you whiny little dick. No one made you accept the deal.
Newly-minted Senator Elizabeth Warren released a statement:
Beginning in 2008, the federal government poured billions of dollars into AIG to save it from bankruptcy. AIG’s reckless bets nearly crashed our entire economy. Taxpayers across this country saved AIG from ruin, and it would be outrageous for this company to turn around and sue the federal government because they think the deal wasn’t generous enough. Even today, the government provides an ongoing, stealth bailout, propping up AIG with special tax breaks — tax breaks that Congress should stop. AIG should thank American taxpayers for their help, not bite the hand that fed them for helping them out in a crisis.
In other words, if AIG thinks they got too little, they’re delusional. They’re got too much and are still getting too much. Corporate welfare beggars can’t be choosers.
Politico provides excellent example of shitty polling reporting.
Sen. Scott Brown is locked in a tie with his Democratic challenger, Elizabeth Warren, according to a poll released Monday, with Warren’s popularity slipping over the past month.
Brown and Warren are neck and neck with 47 percent each, according to the Boston Globe poll. Without including voters who are leaning toward one candidate, Brown has a slight edge, 45 percent to 43 percent.
Most of the polls conducted in the past month have shown Warren gaining an edge on the incumbent, who is trying to hold on to the seat he won in a January 2010 special election. A WBUR poll released last week showed Warren with a 6-percentage-point edge, 50 percent to 44 percent.
The piece goes on to report in extremely definite terms how Warren’s favorables have plummeted and her campaign is suddenly shrouded in doom. Remember how I warned to to watch out for headlines like “LONE POLL SHOWS SURPRISING RESULT; RACE TURNED ON ITS HEAD!”? This would be one of those headlines.
If we head over to FiveThirtyEight, we see that Warren has led in the last five polls by between 2 points and 9 points. The polling average for the race is Warren +4.5. It’s rated not as lean democratic or likely democratic, but as safe democratic. Warren is given a 95% of victory.
In short, judging from the history of the race and the polling, this is almost certainly an outlier. Politico is hyping a poll result that turns the race on its head — mostly to get you to click on the link. The odds of this race going the way this single poll shows are extremely slim.
This isn’t reporting, this is a traffic strategy. I provided the link to the story to be thorough and because of best practices — there’s no reason you should reward this sort of behavior by following it.
Latest poll has Brown at 38% in Massachusetts.
Which explains why the campaign has turned insanely racist in recent days.
Saw this on Facebook today. If you didn’t know already, Scott Brown is a racist asshole. Lets hope Massachusetts have the conscience to vote this asshole out.
Wow. Just fucking wow.
This shit is not cute.
THE FUCK IS THIS
Filed under “things that are really fucking racist.”
(via stfuconservatives)
If you like your debater to be condescending, snide, repetitive, off topic, rote, eager to get personal, willing to toss out extraneous comments and charges, and full of phony manners (thanking the host for every question), then Sen. Scott Brown is your man.
New poll has Elizabeth Warren up 6 in Massachusetts.
“This may be not just due to her speech, but the overall enthusiasm Democrats have had coming out of their convention,” says Tim Vercellotti, professor of political science and director of the Polling Institute at Western New England University. “The data shows that Democrats are more fired up right now than independents or Republicans.”
Is this polling or archeology?
Hotline on Call has a poll that seems to be bad news for Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts:
Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., leads Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren by 10 points in a private Massachusetts Senate race poll.
The poll, conducted by Opinion Dynamics for Boston-based consulting firm Mass Insight Global Partnerships, shows Brown winning 52 percent to Warren’s 42 percent, the second poll in two weeks giving Brown a wide lead. A Suffolk University poll released Feb. 16 put Brown up 9 points, 49 percent to 40 percent, departing from earlier surveys that portrayed a narrow lead for Warren.
A Mass Insight poll in October showed Brown with a five-point edge over Warren, 44 to 39.
This is all very interesting until you get to the very final paragraph of the piece (emphasis mine):
Conducted from Jan. 31 to Feb. 4, the poll surveyed 456 registered voters and carries a plus/minus error margin of 4.6 percent. Mass Insight presented the poll to clients this morning at a meeting in Boston.
What the hell? This thing’s almost a month old. This is definitely not putting the “new” into “news.” You’ve got to wonder why Mass Insight sat on this thing for so long. There’s no way this is accurate anymore. The report even tells us, “The new poll does not reflect the weeks of controversy around Brown’s co-sponsorship of legislation permitting employers to restrict access to contraception insurance coverage on religious grounds.”
These numbers are useless.
