I think they are obligated to deliver me to Zurich at a time that is reasonably close to my scheduled arrival time, absent any weather issues. If they fail to do that, they should help mitigate my added expenses, but only if there is an easy and cheap way to do that. Changing my destination would have been cheap and easy. "Opposite side of the country" is a dramatic statement. It was a comparable flight.
Or at least at a macro level, AA has a responsibility to address operational issues that impact delays and cancellations. Whether they should be penalized by regulation requiring them to pay for damages, or simply by consumers voting with their dollars in a free market, is a matter for another thread I suppose.
The fact is that AA is dealing with high employee turnover and other operational issues (especially at LAX where I go thru a lot) that make it a completely logical decision, in my case, to find another airline to fly. Delays and cancellations by AA have cost me over $2500 in non-reimbursable expenses in the last year, and that is even when I have allowed for 5-6 hour buffers to allow for delays.
So I will vote with my consumer dollars and stop fighting AA about this, to your point. I agree 100% with your comment that it is not worth my time and trouble. Thank you (truly) for responding to this thread and helping me face the reality of the situation. I certainly don't need any extra stress in my life! :-)