The Treasury, as major shareholder of such credit boom casualties as Citigroup and General Motors, showed with its $3.8 billion infusion into GMAC that it can still be counted on to safeguard the financial system from systemic collapse. The auto-loan company, which had dutifully spread its wings into mortgages in the housing boom, wound up becoming a bank to qualify for TARP bailout funds a year ago – the day after Christmas 2008, to be precise. How could Treasury say no?

Now taxpayers are plonking another $3.8 billion into GMAC to help cover mortgage losses. That gives us another majority shareholding in a company that could not have survived to pay its bills, workers and its executives without aid. No, it’s not much in terms of the government’s balance sheet. But it should rankle in Congress when lawmakers come back from holiday.

Not far behind the brouhaha over universal health care lays the still smoldering debate over “too big to fail”. Is it naïve to note that the timing of GMAC’s new lifeline came when legislators were safely tucked away at home? Arguing that AIG was too big to fail, with its myriad confusing and distracting derivative contracts, and that GM was too big to fail, with its strategic position just behind the aorta of the American manufacturing heartland, or even that Citigroup, with its corner office (sans fireplace) in the U.S. superbanking community can somehow be extended to GMAC might seem farfetched to fiscal hawks.

A report in the New York Post last week certainly would have helped GMAC’s cause. The paper said that Warren Buffett was looking at taking on at least part of ResCap, GMAC’s real estate lending operation. That would probably have gone some way to convincing Treasury folk that GMAC was moving in the right direction. Many analysts see GMAC’s mortgage assets, which make up about a third of the company’s $178.2 billion balance sheet, as the main obstacle to the lender reaching profitability. GMAC said after the capital infusion it does not expect to record more major losses from its mortgage lending unit, which should help stabilize results. Well, if majority government ownership doesn’t stabilize the situation, too big to fail would not be an issue.

Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow? This message was repeated throughout the day with GM extending its deadline for Saab bids, Britain’s Takeover Panel granting Cadbury three more days to publish 2009 results and Japan Airlines stock continuing a long slide with growing expectations the company is heading for bankruptcy.

For the big picture Bloomberg pours cold water on M&A hopes in 2010, reporting a rebound may be years away.

Looking back, and forward, here is a small sampling of the week’s end-of-year lists:

Mean Street: Caveat Lector! Ten Predictions for 2010 (WSJ)

Eight trends to look for in 2010 (VentureBeat)

Ten Years: Biggest Losers in Tech (CrunchGear)

The most memorable financial stories of 2009 (Los Angeles Times)

“What’s in store for 2010” (naked capitalism)

Where Are They Now? Top Deals of the Decade (peHUB)

Saab workers are probably reminding themselves it is always darkest just before the dawn, which takes a lot longer to arrive in the Scandinavian winter than anywhere else. With the lights set to start going out at Saab plants, word surfaced that parent General Motors’ Dec. 31 deadline for bids was being extended into early January.

GM had given itself to the end of this month to consider bids for loss-making Saab while continuing a process to wind down the company, which has drawn interest from Dutch luxury carmaker Spyker and others. Spyker Cars Chief Executive Victor Muller said in a text message GM had extended the deadline for a final offer from Spyker Cars until Jan. 7, and added he believed there are multiple bidders for Saab.

As we’ve noted previously in DealZone, having emerged from bankruptcy means GM doesn’t have to manage deadlines for asset sales with creditors breathing down its neck. Sure, they have to keep an eye on Congress, which holds a majority stake of the company. But with healthcare, the financial overhaul and terrorism to worry about, GM could well keep extending the deadline for a few months. Plus, its worth keeping in mind what kind of exposure GM is running here, and what a week or two really means for GM to keep the lights on at Saab.

The operation costs about a million dollars a day to run, and sales of Saab cars account for 1 percent of overall sales. Any prospective buyer will want to get hold of the operations while they are still warm, rather than have to pay to restart shuttered machines. While GM may be serious about getting out of Saab quickly, the deadline could turn out to be something a lot less morbid than it sounds if GM smells a palatable deal out there.