(Yes, this is a lame set-up on my part).

Now substitute the names Gustaffson and Tejada for Greta Garbo and Raquel Welch, and your ability to answer becomes easier.

Stage names.

Yes, it was a common practice to Americanize your name at one time.

Just like David Kaminsky, Muzyad Yakhoob, Henry John Deutschendorf Jr, Anna Maria Italiano and Alphonso D'Abruzzo did ... along with many, many others. Some were born here, some weren't - but they all had a common thread. They all wanted their identities to be decidedly American.

Millions of immigrants to this country did the same thing when they arrived - as did my own predecessors.

It was called assimilation.

Associated Press writer Deepti Hajela says that having a President with such an unusual name like Barack Hussein Obama (remember, he used to go by Barry once upon a time) changes, what she calls, the "name game."

Names traditionally considered "American" tend to be "British-sounding stuff," said Cleveland Evans, professor of psychology at Bellevue University in Nebraska. "We are still basically an English-culture country. We really are still in many ways at our base an Anglo-Saxon culture."

In truth, Mr. Evans, we are a free-religion, Judeo-Christian value-based, English-culture country - the most accommodating, least racist nation in all the world - but I digress.

He (Cleveland Evans) pointed out that immigrants have long had a history of changing their names to fit in more with the United States, or have even had others change it for them.

And there wasn't a damn thing wrong with that.

Immigrants to the United States were deliberately making the effort to "fit in."

In school they used to teach the phrase E Pluribus Unum? Remember that one? Quaint, I know ... but I like it.

Obama, born in Hawaii and named after his Kenyan father, went by Barry for some years before deciding to use his full first name.

Electing someone named Barack Obama president reflects a shift in attitudes about names that's been going on in American society for the past few decades, says Laura Wattenberg, a name expert and author who runs the blog The Baby Name Wizard.

Wait.

(Reading that last line over a few times).

Electing Obama reflected a shift in attitudes about names? What on earth does that mean? His name was part of his appeal then?

So, America is finally starting to throw off the century-old first-name shackles of "John," "Jim," and "Tom" for more non-American sounding names?

And this "unshackling" of the stale Anglo baby-name pool for a more internationally flavored one is a plus? (I'm just trying to understand the thinking here).

Okay, maybe I'm all wet about this.

Fact is ... Obama's name could have been "Saline Solution," and he would have won.

"As a group, American parents are naming much more creatively and are striving to be distinctive with the names they pick," she said, pointing out that shift started in the 1960s when Obama was born and has only accelerated in the last 25 years or so.

A president named Obama could break down the perception "that there is such a thing as a 'normal' name," said Wattenberg.

"It's a powerful symbol of breaking down barriers where it wasn't that long ago where kids with a non-English name would go to school and teachers would routinely change it. The president having a non-English name is a sign that we're not squeezing everyone into that box," she said.

Here we go again - more sub-groups of Americans breaking out of "boxes."

Sometimes, to read about this country from Leftocrats, you'd have to believe we come in just under Nazi Germany, toothaches and painful rectal itch in terms of goodness.

I'm sorry, there is such a thing as a normal name, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Please don't misunderstand my point.

I am not saying that naming a child something unusual and unique is a bad thing, or shouldn't be done. I certainly don't want jackbooted nomenclature squads taking to maternity wards across the map making sure Anglo-sounding names are committed to birth certificates.

Rather, I despair at the slow erosion of my nation's culture.

Wishing to Americanize one's name spoke volumes about the desire to become part of the already existing fabric - a place so desired by people from every corner of the world that they were willing to abandon the lives they knew for the opportunity to become an American. It was as patriotic a gesture as any.

It was beautiful.

If there has been any "shift" in recent decades, it is the desire not to celebrate the American ideals and values that have served to unify people from diverse backgrounds the world over. (Again, think E Pluribus Unum here - Out of Many, One). It is, rather, the celebration - and amplification - of that diversity, i.e., multiculturalism, that is emphasized in place of the American ideal.

I'm certain to get some e-mails saying things like, "What's with you, Roman? What are you saying? You want everyone named Michael? Or Jennifer? You idiot!"

Nope.

Not at all.

Rather, it is commentary on the bigger issue of the slow disintegration of an explicit American culture - one I happen to revere very much.

I like the "box" we have here.

By the way ... Danny Kaye, Danny Thomas, John Denver, Anne Bancroft and Alan Alda.

Cops want to know..

Police were reviewing video from surveillance cameras in an attempt to identify who trampled to death a Wal-Mart worker after a crowd of post-Thanksgiving shoppers burst through the doors at a suburban store and knocked him down.

Criminal charges were possible, but identifying individual shoppers in Friday's video may prove difficult, said Detective Lt. Michael Fleming, a Nassau County police spokesman.

Other workers were trampled as they tried to rescue the man, and customers stepped over him and became irate when officials said the store was closing because of the death, police and witnesses said.

Indeed, you read that correctly ... customers "became irate when officials said the store was closing because of death."

-

Yet, it was Obama who peppered Americans with his now legendary "95% tax cut" prattle time and time again, staying on point, convincing enough Americans that two-plus-two was five, making John McCain sound like a Warner Brothers cartoon character after Mel Blanc's death. (Sure, Yosemite Sam looked all right, but after hearing him speak, you'd scream at the televison, "What the hell is this?" )

Trying anyway.

If the new Congress sits on their hands regarding the Bush tax cuts next year, which expire at the end of 2010 – and the economy improves even a little bit by then – Dems can continue to own and frame the tax debate in this country, while Republicans scramble to try and reclaim it …

There's so much bailout bread being baked right now - enough to keep the next sixty-five thousand generations buried in tax withholding hell - that actually raising rates on the American "rich" may not have to happen as originally prescribed.

The Obama-lama-ding-dongs can simply leave them to die, free of fanfare or fingerprints. Clinton-era rates will then zap back into place.

Richard Rubin at CQ Politics writes:

Congressional Democrats have spent the past eight years itching for a chance to undo their least favorite Bush-era policies.

But it increasingly looks like one of the administration's initiatives most often criticized by Democrats -- tax cuts for top earners -- won't get touched by the 111th Congress.

As he worries about doing anything that could dampen his economic recovery efforts, President-elect Barack Obama has been vague about whether he wants Congress to repeal the tax cuts or just let them expire as scheduled Dec. 31, 2010. He said earlier this week that he would wait for a recommendation from his recently appointed economic team.

Good save, Mr. Prez-El.

Take notice out there - especially all of you young, up-and-coming Obamalicious Democrats ... That's called CYA 101.

Study it. Live it. Love it.

Republicans are likely to continue their efforts to extend all of the Bush-era tax cuts (PL 107-16, PL 108-27) beyond their expiration date, providing automatic objections to repeal. Meanwhile, and more strikingly, some key Democratic tax writers in Congress are now saying that they, too, want to let the clock run out. …

In two years time, as congressional seats everywhere go up for grabs, you may very well see Big Bam and Company making comments like this:

“As you know, Democrats did not raise income taxes on the wealthiest Americans, despite Republican fear-mongering that we would. At the end of this year, the tax rates will simply return to Clinton-era levels, when the economy was very strong, yadda, blah, yeah...”

Of course, it was that side - specifically Bam himself - who kept hammering into our cumulative skulls that the "richest 5% of Americans" would be the ones to see tax hikes in order to stimulate the economy. But as long as trillions - yes, trillions - of dollars are already pledged to be siphoned from the wallets of American taxpayers in the name of rescuing practically everything in God's creation anyway, why even bother?

But Dems, who cannot stomach the concept of permitting the wealthiest Americans any kind of tax relief, hate Republican control more.

Therefore, they adapt when and where necessary.

Copping the tax issue, pounding home the word "cuts" at every turn, and manipulating the truth to sound perfectly reasonable was a huge winner.

(But worry not ... there will be a plethora of taxes coming from the Obamacrats in twenty other forms or another. Bam the Tax Man, after all, is a lib).

Which brings up the question ... If raising taxes is harmful to a sick economy - as even Democratic New York Governor David Patterson recently asserted when talking about possible solutions to the economic troubles befalling his state - why would it ever be beneficial to a healthy one?

Just asking.

It's all ishkabibble.

The real solution to the economic ills that have beleaguered the United States - and the world - is to simply say that a product or service is loved by "The One" - Barack Obama.

Then, look out!

Want an example of the change Barack Obama is bringing to the country?

Check out cookie sales at Baby Boomers Cafe in Des Moines.

Ever since word spread about the president-elect and his family's fondness for Baby Boomers' chocolate chunk cookies, the small downtown restaurant can't bake them fast enough.

"Two months ago I was giving these cookies away," said co-owner Rodney Maxfield. "Now, it's like 'I need two dozen cookies. I need four-dozen cookies.'"

The Obamas became frequent visitors to the cafe last summer when the Illinois senator devoted much of his time to Iowa, where the state's precinct caucuses kick off the presidential nominating process. Obama's main office was next door to Boomers, and his staff made the cafe a second home.

...

"I think everybody just ... thought, 'Oh, great cookie, great president—the world is a happy place. Barack's going to fix all the problems and if I have a bite of this cookie it's going to make me feel good,'" Maxfield said.

Now, I'm inspired.

How about this for another revenue generating idea ...

Start circulating more pictures of the next President smoking his cigarettes.

Then, get some Madison Avenue whiz kid with Photoshop skills to create a shock and awe media campaign geared toward the 18-39 set - something like "OBAMA BE SMOKIN'!" ... or "NEWPORT FOR A NEW AMERICA!"

Then, get Democrats in states like New York to boost the cigarette tax yet again - to something like $10.50 a pack. (And be sure to hire additional mail Nazis to keep out-of-state cigarettes from being smuggled in).

Just watch sales sky-rocket!

In every house in Obama's America - or, at least, in the lower 95% of wage earning homes - a chicken in every pot, someone else's tax dollars in every wallet and a Marlboro Light dangling from every mouth.

Even tobacco farmers would be raking in the green.

Sales for phlegm reducing medications would see a serious spike - eventually.

Everyone wins, baby.

 

-

When asked in 2006 on Dennis Prager's radio show if he thought the United States, on balance, has predominantly been a force for good or bad in the world, Howard Zinn, well-known leftist, historian and America-hater, answered:

"Probably more bad than good. We've done some good, of course ... but we have done too many bad things in the world. If you look at the way we have used our armed force throughout our history - first, destroying the Indian communities of this continent and annihilating Indian tribes ..."

...followed by a whole lot of blah, blah, blah.

(Like you didn’t see that coming).

Almost as much of a tradition as turkey, cranberry sauce, Dallas Cowboys football and pumpkin pie are the annual Thanksgiving Day editorials and opinion pieces which sound like they could have come directly from the pen of Zinn (and others), printed almost everywhere, lamenting the horrifically murderous origins of the United States - the wiping out of indigenous people, the calculated spreading of disease, slavery, raping, pillaging, you name it.

For example, today's editorial page of the Redmond Reporter opines:

Columbus, in fact, was the precursor to a mass genocide. More than 100 years later, the Pilgrims arrived peacefully to participate in the first Thanksgiving dinner. But, instead they opened the door to more death and destruction of the Native Americans.

Eventually, they became the minority, captives in their own land. You can bet, they were never thankful for the famine, war, death, and plagues brought on by the Europeans.

Thanksgiving was a holiday created by President Abraham Lincoln to give Americans something to be thankful for during the Civil War. People can be thankful for a lot of things, but genocide should not be one of them.

To read these guilt-ridden shame-peddlers, who ironically benefit tremendously from the freedoms and opportunities afforded them in this country – suffering from what Rush Limbaugh sometimes calls “affluenza” – you’d almost have to conclude that although the failings of humanity may have manifested themselves in various ways before the founding of the United States, they have never done so with such ferocity, never to such a degree and never with such reward since the founding.

The author obviously went to an American University.

Okay, first ... a tiny history lesson (If you know this already, skip ahead).

Let's be clear, the holiday was not created by Lincoln. Rather, it became a consistently annual one under Lincoln. There were, in fact, many instances of a Thanksgiving holiday prior to 1863.

In 1777, the Continental Congress gave the first National Proclamation of Thanksgiving:

"It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive Powers of these UNITED STATES to set apart THURSDAY, the eighteenth Day of December next, for SOLEMN THANKSGIVING and PRAISE: That at one Time and with one Voice, the good People may express the grateful Feelings of their Hearts, and consecrate themselves to the Service of their Divine Benefactor;"

The next year in 1778, Samuel Adams authored a Thanksgiving resolution, approved by Congress in November, writing:

"It having pleased Almighty God through the Course of the present year, to bestow great and manifold Mercies on the People of these United States."

" Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be. That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks, for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation..."

Good stuff.

And there were many others - not only at a national level, but at a state level as well. (It's not difficult to do the research. Really.)

Now, as far as genocide is concerned - and I admit to a touch of fascination with how Leftocrats choose the words they will bastardize and dilute while still managing to keep straight faces - let me be as explicit as possible.

The idea that Europeans committed genocide against the indigenous North American population is categorically false. It did not happen. The evidence and the historical record do not corroborate these claims. Indeed, there were slaughters, bloody battles, all out wars waged and ugliness to be sure ... but to claim genocide is a flat out lie. Genocide's meaning is as unambiguous as a definition can be - the deliberate, calculated, systematic destruction of a particular group.

That America has "evolved" to the point where offense is taken at honoring what is often called the first Thanksgiving in 1621, and words like "genocide" are tossed around so freely and easily, speaks volumes about those who hawk these contemptible myths.

Frankly, it's disgusting.

So long as the invading Europeans can be portrayed in the most negative light possible and school children can be made to bewail the earth-loving civilizations that were obliterated by the invading peace-pummeling, weapons-loving, land raping, slave owners, Thanksgiving will still have a place.

Nauseating.

Every single ethnic group and race will have wielded equal influence on all things related to the founding of this country by the time the history books are reconstructed with a multicultural pen.

At some point, it may not be unreasonable to expect to "discover" that there were actually Muslims or Africans or Atlantians at that first Thanksgiving table almost four centuries ago.

(I digress)

As far as the real meaning of the holiday ... don't even think of bringing God into the discussion.

It is really about the Indians teaching the stumbling, bumbling Europeans to catch eels.

As evidenced by the recent events in Claremont, California - where the parents of kindergarten students have been clashing over the 40-year tradition at Condit Elementary School of kids dressing like Pilgrims and Indians to celebrate Thanksgiving – moronic hippie-trail sensitivity (critical leftist thinking) is trying to redefine the rules of the game … again.

As one parent put it:

"It's demeaning. I'm sure you can appreciate the inappropriateness of asking children to dress up like slaves (and kind slave masters), or Jews (and friendly Nazis), or members of any other racial minority group who has struggled in our nation's history."

Umm ...

Okay.

The inability to solicit critical thought from the Left no longer astounds me. I accept it - like losing socks on laundry day or belly button lint.

I have always thought of the Thanksgiving holiday this way, as expressed by George Washington:

"...that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions, to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually, to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed, to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shown kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord."

Under the Constitution, there is no such thing as the Office of the President-elect. Technically, Obama will not even become the president-elect until the Electoral College convenes after the second Wednesday in December and elects him based on the results of the Nov. 4 general election, as stated in the Constitution.

Look out!

Lovely Rita and her 199 brothers and sisters are now on the payroll.

Cash-starved New York City has deployed two-hundred new meter maids to the streets in an attempt to generate revenue.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you haven't already, you better make it your business to mind your behind-the-wheel Ps and Qs, because it’s ticket-writin’ time!

The city's latest move to close the budget gap is annoying New Yorkers to no end. Soon, you may not be able to avoid the police no matter what you do.

 

"You get stuck out there in the middle; not because you're not paying attention," driver Rob Frangavilla said. "People walk across; you're stuck there. I just think it's a crazy way to raise money."

"No more tickets, because they're so aggressive," driver Ephraim Kaufman said. "It's unbelievable. Like, you go to pay the ticket -- for machine -- but while you put in the money to buy the ticket they give you a ticket!"

The goal is to raise $66 million. (Compared to the trillions being bandied about in all the "bailout" hooplah, this is chump change).

100 of the pen-slinging, windshield-tagging traffic flow specialists will be dispersed throughout Manhattan, while the other 100 will be scattered in the outer boroughs.

However, Staten Island, the least populated of the city's five boroughs – and the only one that consistently votes Republican, incidentally – will not be subject to the meter maid surge.

Just thought I’d throw that in.

_

 

At least John McCain is back to his old self. This assumes, of course, at some point he wasn't.

Believe me, he was. (See the entire 2008 campaign).

He's back to being the crotchety old Republicrat spitfire, Mac the Mav.

That reach-across-the-aisle, strolling-down-the-median joie de vivre he possesses (and can beckon at will) is throttling up for the new administration.

Goodie gumdrops.

Since the time is just about right for McCain to ride the wave of ascendancy back into the good graces of the media (who, you'll recall, once upon a time, had rockets in their pockets for him when he was still their beloved "maverick," only to turn on him once he became the lead obstacle for "The One"), what better way to worm his way back into fishwrap favor than to get "comprehensive" with illegal immigration?

You remember that golden nugget, don't you?

It was all the rage in 2007.

It looks as though it'll make a hasty return in the early going of the Obama Chronicles next year, according to Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.

On immigration, there's been an agreement between (President-elect Barack) Obama and (Arizona Republican Sen. John) McCain to move forward on that. ... We'll do that. We have to get this economy stuff figured out first, so I think we'll have a shot at doing something on health care in the next Congress for sure. ...

We've got McCain and we've got a few others. I don't expect much of a fight at all. Now health care is going to be difficult. That's a very complicated issue. We debated at great length immigration. People understand the issues very well. We have not debated health care, so that's going to take a lot more time to do.

Everyone who saw this coming, go grab an "attaboy" out of petty cash. (Don't worry, there are a ton of them in there).

If, however, for some reason, McCain finds himself too busy bucking his own side of the auditorium during the next session of Congress to blow kisses over to the Dems, no worries...

Over at the Hot Air blog, AllahPundit writes:

And if they don’t get around to it in this Congress? Good news — Maverick’s officially running for re-election, so he can be the GOP point man for The One in 2011 or 2012 if need be. Exit question: Any predictions on how the Senate vote will shake out next time? Given the beating McCain took from Hispanic voters, I’ll put the over/under at 70.

Add to the lovefest, the announcement of Obama's new immigration team, headed by Stanford law professor Tino Cuéllar, described by John Trasviña, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, as "brilliant beyond his years."

Ooh, yummie. A lawyer.

More goodie gumdrops.

Needless to say, Obama's new "border boys" aren't thrilling anyone on our side. While many of "The One's" other appointments thus far have proven slightly less than horrible - even though none of them would be on my fifth string team - I get that queasy kind of uneasy looking at those who will be charged with formulating "sound immigration policy" for the United States.

As Tyche Hendricks of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote:

" ... Cuéllar was named this week to lead President-elect Barack Obama's transition working group on immigration, putting him among the many scholars from the Bay Area who are helping shape the next administration. Lawyers and immigration experts across the country praised him Friday for his intellect and his grasp of both regulatory minutiae and the big picture of American immigration policy."

Once I reached the words "scholars from the Bay Area," I walked.

Here's a question ... In terms of how many months after Bam's inaguration, how long until the borders look like - what my mother used to call my room - who-did-it-and-ran?

Is the United States headed for a horrible demise? Will it break apart under the weight of its own gluttony and egocentricity? Is it only a matter of time?

Well, a fairly prominent talking head from across the sea says that its time to pick out burial plots and call the undertaker.

Crying time is coming.

A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.

Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."

The paper said Panarin's dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year's events.

When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator."

My wish - with the death of America only a camel's eyelash away from becoming a reality - is that I have time to get to B&H Photo in Manhattan before the end comes. They have a kick-butt thermal CD printer I've been putting off getting, and it's nearly 50% off. I can only imagine the hassle if the country doesn't exist by the time I get there.

Also … before America splits into its separate chunks, perhaps something can be worked out where the liberals all agree to congregate in their own little apportioned slices of used-to-be America and set up shop there, leaving the rest to the grown-ups. They can nanny-state, regulate, appease, over-tax and foster all the dependency and entitlement they like over there.

Could prove fun to watch.

With all that subsidized farming they'll have, maybe some sort of trade deal can be worked out.

-

Embarrassing.

Really.

The Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) created a thirty-three question American civics exam. The quiz - multiple choice - consisted of questions that ranged from the Constitution to basic American history. It was administered to approximately 2,500 people.

The numbers are not pretty - and it turns out that "ordinary citizens" know more than elected officials do.

The scores are pretty pathetic.

From Yahoo News:

US elected officials scored abysmally on a test measuring their civic knowledge, with an average grade of just 44 percent, the group that organized the exam said Thursday.

Ordinary citizens did not fare much better, scoring just 49 percent correct on the 33 exam questions compiled by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI).

"It is disturbing enough that the general public failed ISI's civic literacy test, but when you consider the even more dismal scores of elected officials, you have to be concerned," said Josiah Bunting, chairman of the National Civic Literacy Board at ISI.

"How can political leaders make informed decisions if they don't understand the American experience?" he added.

The question that received the fewest correct responses, just 16 percent, tested respondents' basic understanding of economic principles, asking why "free markets typically secure more economic prosperity than government's centralized planning?"

Feel free to take the test yourself here.

Unless you're confident (or you know that anyone you're with is more ignorant than you), take it when no one else is around.

No need to be ranked among the embarrassed.

The U.S. government is prepared to provide more than $7.76 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers after guaranteeing $306 billion of Citigroup Inc. debt yesterday. The pledges, amounting to half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, are intended to rescue the financial system after the credit markets seized up 15 months ago.

The unprecedented pledge of funds includes $3.18 trillion already tapped by financial institutions in the biggest response to an economic emergency since the New Deal of the 1930s, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The commitment dwarfs the plan approved by lawmakers, the Treasury Department’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. Federal Reserve lending last week was 1,900 times the weekly average for the three years before the crisis.

The worst financial crisis in two generations has erased $23 trillion, or 38 percent, of the value of the world’s companies and brought down three of the biggest Wall Street firms. 

Who says nothing happens on a Sunday night?

The federal government agreed Sunday night to rescue Citigroup Inc. by helping to absorb potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in losses on toxic assets on its balance sheet and injecting fresh capital into the troubled financial giant.

The agreement marks a new phase in government efforts to stabilize U.S. banks and securities firms. After injecting nearly $300 billion of capital into financial institutions, federal officials now appear to be willing to help shoulder bad assets, on a targeted basis, from specific institutions.

Under the plan, Citigroup and the government have identified a pool of about $306 billion in troubled assets. Citigroup will absorb the first $29 billion in losses in that portfolio. After that, three government agencies -- the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. -- will take on any additional losses, though Citigroup could have to share a small portion of additional losses.

In addition, the Treasury Department also will inject $20 billion of fresh capital into Citigroup. That comes on top of the $25 billion infusion that Citigroup recently received as part of the the broader U.S. banking-industry bailout.

The Treasury Department is already facing a political backlash over the use of taxpayer funds to stabilize the banking sector, and has nearly exhausted the $350 billion that Congress allotted to the first phase of the industry rescue.

Despite the unprecedented scope of the rescue plan, it's not clear whether it will be enough to stabilize Citigroup. The roughly $300 billion pool of assets that are included in the rescue plan represent only a sliver of the company's more than $3 trillion in assets, including its holdings in off-balance-sheet entities.

Jitters about such "hidden" assets helped trigger the nose-dive in Citigroup's stock last week. Among the off-balance-sheet assets are $667 billion in mortgage-related securities.

That little pearl bears a cut-and-paste: "Among the off-balance-sheet assets are $667 billion in mortgage-related securities."

Two days ago, I linked to a story about an elementary school on Long Island in New York that changed its name to honor Barack Obama. The urgency in that action was such that the school board made the change effective immediately.

Well, from Long Island to South Florida ... say goodbye to Pervis Avenue in Opa-Locka, and say hello to Barack Obama Avenue.

The city commission voted on the name change last week and officials say it is expected to finalize the approval next month.

Opa-locka is a predominantly heavily African-American community north of downtown Miami.

The change is expected to take place on President's Day, 2009.

The fact that this name change - surely, the first in a long line of nomenclature realignment to come - is happening on the most useless, irrelevant, joke of a holiday on the calendar is not without its significance.

_

 

Sarah Baxter from the Times Online in Great Britain writes:

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama promised to get a million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015. His own new presidential limousine will be far from green, however.

The Obamobile being prepared for the president-elect is said to be a monster gas-guzzler made by General Motors, the troubled car giant. It will look like a black Cadillac but is built like a tank. A spy photographer who tracks down future car models for magazines snatched pictures of the heavily disguised first-car-in-waiting when it was being road-tested last summer.

The armour-plated car, which has a raised roof, windows up to 5in thick, extra-strength tyres and a body made of steel, aluminium, titanium and ceramics, is thought to be based on a GMC 2500 truck that gets less than 10 miles to the gallon.

When the planet plunges into catostrophic ruin – and we’re practically there already, by most accounts - we’ll know where pointing fingers will be aimed.

Andrew Roman, Brooklyn, NY