One of convicted swindler Bernard Madoff's daughers-in-law wants to change her last name because she claims that her family has been open to a lot of ridicule and threats because of the infamy that name has taken on.
Stephanie Madoff, who is married to Madoff's son Mark, wants to change her--and her children's--last name to Morgan. Her husband has given his OK to this change.
I guess that is a good choice, but still links her family up with a name that reeks of privilege.
Does the name J.P. Morgan ring a bell? Doesn't she want to distance herself from money matters entirely by changing her and her kids' last name?
I mean, at this point in time, the Madoff name is nearly as bad as having a last name of Hitler. Or maybe even Woods.
Here are some last name suggestions I can think up:
Jeter: Derek is the darling of sports, and has been for years. It might be a good name to use to earn back some respectability.)
Obama: If she had decided to do this a year ago, maybe it would have worked. Now, I am not so sure.
McGwire: In the 1990s, absolutely. He brought the power of the home run back to baseball. Now, admitting to using steroids, I doubt it.
Leno: No good. He is looked at by some as the evil-doer who did in Conan O'Brien.
O'Brien: A traditional name for sure, but if Conan O'Brien doesn't do something quickly, his name will fade away, so maybe this is a good one to choose.
Letterman: Only use this name if the family can keep its pants on.
Woods: See above.
Maybe the best suggestion would be to go without a last name. Look what it has done for Cher, Madonna, Liberace ...
I've got it! Here is the name they should use:
LAPKA! I have used it for nearly 53 years and it is beyond reproach.
Nah, wouldn't work.
I guess Morgan isn't so bad after all.
No comments:
Post a Comment