Georgia On My Mind 2.0

In March, I posted a blog describing the scourge of Alzheimer's and the way it was taking control of my mother-in-law, Georgia Kolb. Having then recently dropped my crystal ball, I had no way of knowing what the future held for my bride's mother.

Sadly, Georgia passed away, suddenly and unexpectedly on Tuesday morning, the day after the 29th anniversary of my biological mother's passing. Georgia died in her sleep, succumbing to a stomach flu bug that a healthier incubator might have outlasted. We were blessed that Mom maintained a level of cognizance with family and friends that enabled us all to avoid the anguish of losing our close personal connections. She never suffered. She merely left us much too soon.

I thought I would publish the obituary I just wrote as a tribute to Mom. She was a part of my life for more than 30 years, 12 years longer than my biological mother, especially significant when one considers that I could walk and talk from the day of our initial meeting.

The obituary does not go into much detail about my personal relationship with this remarkable woman. She welcomed me into her family, and gave me her daughter, notwithstanding the differences in our faiths and notwithstanding the importance of faith in her own life. She respected the fact that her grandchildren would be raised in a non-Christian home; she made a commitment not to interfere with their religious upbringing and she was true to her word. As a result, Phillip and Ellie have a deeper respect for their grandparents' faith, grew up without being conflicted and understand that there is room in the world for many traffic lanes to God.

The obituary does not go into much detail about the mischievous times we shared. When her health allowed, we made regular trips to Mystic Lake casino during her visits to the Twin Cities. She loved the fact that she could sneak away with her son-in-law, smoke her Virginia Slims without getting busted, and brag to the doorman that she was the kind of mother-in-law that I wanted to spend time with. During a family trip to Cancun, we over-sampled jumbo margaritas one night, much to the chagrin of my bride and my father-in-law and much to the amazement of Phil and Ellie, who had never seen Dad and Grandma so "happy".

I know that at nearly 58 it's my turn to start saying "goodbye". I just don't want to get good at writing obituaries. I tried to avoid responsibility for this one. It was too difficult to write and do sufficient justice to its subject. The draft received from the well-meaning scribe from the funeral home, and the look in Deb's eyes when she read it, made avoidance impossible.

Many thanks to my Facebook friends who discerned from my status and the resulting comments what had transpired and expressed their condolences. We've lost another great lady and it is comforting to see how universally that truth is accepted. Here's what I came up with:

Georgia Marie Kolb died Tuesday, December 15, succumbing peacefully to complications from Alzheimer’s disease. With her passing, Big Stone Lake-area residents have lost their Grand Doyenne, a woman with an unbridled passion for life and commitment to serving her family, her church and her community.

Born to Elmer and Ruby (Gagnon) Hamm in Odessa, South Dakota on November 19, 1936, Georgia lived nearly her entire life within a 10 mile radius of her beloved Big Stone Lake. A graduate of Ortonville High School, she and sweetheart Kenny Kolb were married on January 8, 1954.

She and Kenny raised their three children, Kim, Deb and Mark, while Georgia held down various jobs, including positions at the Hilltop Café, the restaurant at the Big Stone Canning Factory and Auchstetter’s Drug Store. Georgia’s warm, embracing personality made her a natural retailer. For nearly 20 years, she operated Georgia’s Apparel in Ortonville, bringing the latest styles personally selected from Fashion Market in Minneapolis to her neighbors on the prairie. For more than 50 years she and Kenny ran Ken’s Fireworks in Big Stone City, becoming one of the largest independently owned fireworks merchants in the State. Customers drive for hundreds of miles each year to reconnect with Georgia and the relationship she established with all of her customers.

Georgia was also a devoted and energetic volunteer on behalf of a number of causes. Not surprisingly, she was a real “firecracker” in her work with the Big Stone Lake Area Tourism, promoting the hosting of the MS Society’s TRAM and professional walleye fishing tournaments on Big Stone Lake. She and Kenny served as Grand Marshalls of the Ortonville Corn Fest Parade. Her efforts were memorialized in a granite monument offering thanks permanently installed at the foot of Big Stone Lake. Her love and support of Tabor United Methodist Church, where she and Kenny were married, resulted in years of devotion to the church’s choir and Fall Harvest, Flower Show and Christmas celebrations. Active in Eastern Star, Georgia rose to serve as Worthy Grand Matron of the Minnesota Chapter.

Of all Georgia’s loves, none were more important than her friends and family. Whether holding court at her weekly Friday Lunch Bunch or warmly embracing her lifelong friends from church, business and the community, all who knew Georgia were blessed with her special sparkle and camaraderie. Luckiest of all to have shared her presence was Georgia’s loving family. Georgia gave unselfishly of herself, showering her children, grandchildren, nephews, nieces, brothers, sisters and in-laws with love and devotion throughout their lives. Georgia set an example for her family by walking the walk of selflessness, a strong work ethic, dedication to the community and a spiritual moral compass.

Georgia is survived by her husband Ken of Ortonville, MN; children, Kim of Big Stone City, SD, Deb (Sam) of Independence, MN, Mark (Karen) of Rockford, MN; grandchildren, Kyle and Shawn Kolb, Phillip and Ellie Stern, Kelly and Kristi Kolb; brothers and sisters in-law, Bob and Marge Kolb and Arlyss and Luane Welde; many nieces and nephews, and special friend, Mary Ann Ulrich. Georgia is preceded in death by her parents, her brother, Robert Hamm, and her sister, Ruth Hamm Wollschlager.

The family wishes to express its thanks to the caregivers at the Golden Living residence in Millbank, South Dakota, and to Golden Living’s resident cuddler, Boots the Cat, for the loving care extended to Georgia over the past months. Memorials are preferred to the Department of Neurology at the University of Minnesota for the support of Alzheimer’s research. Donations may be sent to the Minnesota Medical Foundation, P.O. Box 64001, St. Paul, MN 55164-001.

A celebration of Georgia’s life will take place at Tabor United Methodist Church in Big Stone City, South Dakota at 2:00 p.m., Saturday, January 2, 2010. Visitation will be held at 12:30 p.m. prior to the celebration.

Election Night 2009

It's morning in Independence.

Local elections were held in Independence today. I had spent the past few months working diligently for two of the four candidates vying for two open seats on the Independence City Council. My blog mentor, Charlie Leck, a long time resident of Independence had recruited me and I relished the opportunity to work with him to achieve some good for our community.

The election should have been a cakewalk. My primary focus of support was a long time member and former chair of the planning commission, a cub scout leader, a financial advisor, and a neighborhood community leader. The other candidate we worked for was an incumbent with a thoughtful voting record and a long history of community service. This being a small town in Garrison Keillor's back yard, she is also the choir director at church and teaches piano.

Our two opponents, on the other hand, were not of the Jimmy Stewart genre. One was an incumbent who was prone to throwing temper tantrums at City Council meetings, accusing the mayor and the police department of various conspiracies to undermine his libertarian rights. Through the magic of videos of Council meetings posted on the Independence website, you could actually watch this public servant use language in public forums that, to quote Professor H. Higgins, "would make a sailor blush."

The incumbent's running mate is a free spirit, with a history of engaging in whatever behavior suited his purpose without regard to the laws and regulations that most of us choose to observe. When he owned a lawn service company, he saved a buck by disposing of hazardous chemicals in the wetlands on his property, not caring that they were flowing into the adjacent stream that served as the source of drinking water for his neighbor's livestock, killing them. He moved and asked the City for a conditional use permit to build a barn on his property for the private use of his family. Upon acquiring the permit, he immediately built a large commercial facility and advertised for boarders. When the City tried to stop him from violating the terms of the C.U.P. he applied for, he sued the City. The matter was settled out of court and sealed.

Unfortunately, the election contest was not a cakewalk. My candidates' opponents refused to attend a candidates forum hosted by the League of Women voters, resulting in its cancellation. The opponents spread falsehoods about my candidates, accusing them of everything from wanting to take property without compensation in order to build nature trails throughout the City to wanting to ban all hunting in Independence. As a Jewish kid, I wouldn't really care about the latter but, apparently, it is a big deal to many Independence residents.

Neither of the accusations were true, but truth was not an obstacle to my candidates' opponents.

They circulated an old map developed by an Open Spaces Commission that had looked at ways of preserving the rural nature of Independence notwithstanding its proximity to Minneapolis. The map showed trails which the opponents pointed to as proof of the intent to engage in uncompensated taking. The truth was that the trails were labeled "natural", not "nature", trails and identified existing wildlife migratory patterns.

The cow killer, consistently with his "I'll do what I want" mentality, put out lawn signs and circulated postcards that bore the logo of the Republican Party, even though the race was non-partisan and even though he had neither an endorsement nor permission to utilize the GOP trademark.

Both opponent candidates also promoted reducing the City's budget by disbanding our local police force and contracting with the County Sheriff for police services. Although couched as a demonstration of fiscal conservative-ism, it was really payback for perceived slights. And it turned out to be the opponents' Achilles' Heel.

Without a vigorous local press to shed a light on the nonsense being foisted upon the Independence electorate, we needed to find an issue that energized our supporters, swelled our ranks and got out the vote. The proposed replacement of the police force provided us with that issue.

These days, every candidate running has to promise lower taxes, an improved quality of life and responsiveness to the electorate. Most voters in an off-year election don't give a rat's patootie which candidate prevails on those issues. They've heard it all before. But mess with their public safety and it's a different story.

During the last few days of the campaign, I instructed volunteers who were out knocking on doors asking for support or telephoning to get out the vote to focus on one issue: If we don't elect our candidates, the City Council will vote next year to contract with the Hennepin County Sheriff and close down the local police department. Not voting for our candidates or not voting at all was a vote to dismantle our police force.

THAT threat did the job. The election judges told me this morning that they had been told to expect 250 voters in today's election, representing about 10% of eligible voters. In fact, there were more than 1,030. When the counting was done, my primary candidate had received 698 votes and the incumbent I was supporting received 630. The paranoid libertarian incumbent received about 350 votes. The cow killer received 303 votes.

Folks in the community, once informed of the threats to their public safety that would result from failing to elect my candidates, came out in force and gave us a landslide. In so doing, I believe the electorate also sent a message about what kind of campaign is acceptable in Independence.

So, fortified by large quantities of adrenalin and celebratory rum at the local tavern, I thought it was time to return to my prairie pondering and share the lesson of persistence and reliance on the common sense of voters that manifested itself in God's country today. It feels good to be back.

Sorbet

If you read the "About Me" blurb in the right-hand column, you will see the revelation that "I like to take photographs". This blog was intended originally to allow me to showcase some of my work from time to time. Today seemed like a good time to put the intention to practice while working on the Franken Recount missive promised this morning.

My cousin Kevin and I visited the Minneapolis Sculpture Garden at the Walker Art Museum before Kevin returned home to southern Minnesota after his holiday weekend visit. I happened to have my camera along and was blown away by the photographic opportunities. Not the sculptures, necessarily, magnificent as they are. I was mesmerized by the site as a public gathering place. Tourists, a wedding party, a professional photographer shooting professional musicians, a grandmother comforting a crying infant, a magnificent flower garden teeming with tiny life.

I plan on returning soon with my tripod and macro lens. In the meantime, here's a little sample to cleanse my blogging palate. Click on an image to view a larger version. Feel free to download any you wish. The color in the original images is better than reflected on this blog and can be further tweaked in any photo-editing software.

Senator Franken! (Watch This Space)

Now that Al Franken has finally been declared the winner of Minnesota's U.S. Senate election contest and Norm Coleman has conceded, the embargo on blogging imposed by the Franken Campaign has been lifted. When I volunteered to assist, I agreed not to write about anything I saw or did in connection with the election contest until the election was resolved. Since I served as a volunteer attorney for the campaign during the recount process, I took the directive as a matter of attorney-client privilege until waived.

It was an honor to have assisted ever so slightly with the campaign and a real eye-opener on the machinations of high stakes campaigns, both Democratic and Republican. I'm looking forward to sharing my experiences that helped reaffirm my belief that Minnesota will be well-served by its new junior Senator.

I have to deal with some prior commitments but will be pondering the experience from the prairie soon.

Bad Posture and Bad Posturing: Stooped and Stupid

posture |ˈpäs ch ər|
noun: a position of a person's body when standing or sitting
verb: [ intrans. ] [often as n. ] ( posturing) behave in a way that is intended to impress or mislead others

Jimmy Stewart had good posture. Tall and lanky, he always carried himself proudly and effortlessly. His posturing in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington remains an American classic, the tale of Everyman taking on corruption in Government.

My how times have changed. There has been much posturing coming out of Washington D.C. and Columbia, South Carolina over the past week or so. Senator John Ensign of Nevada and Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina, both stalwart proponents of family values and the sanctity of marriage (particularly when worrying about same sex couples wanting to join the sacred ranks), have been forced to admit to behavior that they publicly refused to tolerate in others.

It made me realize that when one’s posture begins to suffer, there is a tendency to looked stooped. When one’s posturing suffers the fate of public servants Ensign and Sanford, there is a tendency to look stupid.

Judging from press coverage driven by the perception that the public gives a rat’s patootie about the details, I am one of the few people in America that did not care to share the contents of Governor Sanford’s intimate e-mail exchange. When I started writing this, I was under the impression that the Governor had fallen for his Argentine paramour like a lovesick adolescent. Not wanting to be judgmental about affairs of the heart, and not being privy to the condition of his marital relationship, I refused to fault him for giving in to the emotional pull of newly found love. After all, when an irresistible force such as hers meets an old immovable object like him, you can bet, as sure as you live, something’s gotta give, something’s gotta give, something’s gotta give.

Then the SOB acknowledged that he had regularly “crossed the line” when on road trips with his buddies, immediately switching his image from being a hopeless romantic to a self-absorbed boor. And, as noted above, particularly in light of his past posturing about family values and the need for our public servants to set a proper example and his propensity for marching out his beautiful accomplished wife and four sons whenever it made sense for political purposes, he looks stupid.

His Republican colleague, Senator John Ensign looks even dumber. This paragon of virtue who, posturing, called on President Clinton to resign when his dalliances became public, was forced last week to confess that his marital vows were similarly modifiable when the Senator's hormones took control. Now that he, too, has traded civilized restraint and respect for his spouse for the carnal pleasures of the wife of one of his top aides, he’s adopted a different viewpoint on the propriety of resignation.

His pronouncements of trouble in his marriage that led to such behavior are besides the point. When you deem yourself worthy to stand tall and posture about the logical harsh consequences of immoral behavior by public officials, do not subsequently (?) stoop to entering into an adulterous affair with your close friend’s wife and wife’s close friend. You come across as stupid.

On the other hand, I suppose that if everyone experiencing strife in their marriage took that as a get out of “jail” free card and explored intimacy outside of the marital relationship it would, at least, demote the perceived threat posed by same sex couples to the one man/one woman contingent.

Certainly, this is not a partisan issue. But the hypocrisy of those who deem themselves worthy to preach and attempt to impose their alleged moral values on all of us, yet abandon their public principles at the batting of an eyelash (or the tapping of a shoe in a men’s restroom) is sickening and peculiar to social conservatives. You don’t see Barney Frank advocating for same-sex marriage and flying up to Nova Scotia to lose himself in the arms of a lobster heiress. More precisely, even when Barney Frank advocates for same-sex marriage, he adopts a live and let live posture, content to allow those who disagree to carry on in their own lives as they see fit.

So, dear social conservative friends, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Practice what you preach. And if you can’t be with the one you love, love the one you’re with, NOT!

And, finally, Governor Sanford, show some respect for the mother of your children and quit pining in public. Your continued public apologies, couched in excuses, are making matters worse. Being a man means more than flying to Buenos Aires to service your mistress after your wife pleads with you not to see her again. It means owning up to the hurt you've caused and hopes and dreams you've discarded and making amends to your family, if possible, quietly, sincerely and earnestly.

A Thoughtful Analysis of the President's Challenges

Time for a little levity. Click here and enjoy.

And, He's Left-handed (Part 2)

I was right. The last Prairie Pondering blog generated some heat. But after a little more than a week, I'm still in the kitchen.

The response to the concept that President Obama's Cairo speech offered a new approach to the pursuit of peace in the Middle East brought two general reactions. Readers either applauded my observations and shared my yearning for an end to the insanity of U.S. policy (doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result) or they mocked my naiveté and proclaimed the impossibility of Israel's making peace with terrorists who refuse to acknowledge its right to exist.

Here's a couple of samples from the contrarians:

From my good friend, M, in Montreal (see the comments to the blog for her complete response):

Oy, oy, oy Sam. Well written and thoughtful as always, but I think you're putting too much faith into someone who is either genuinely naive (or personally doesn't really care) about Israel, and is only interested in pushing his own agenda without weighing the risks to the one country upon which he is trying to force his will.

BOTTOM LINE: until the Arabs of the Middle East (and the rest of the world) accept that Israel has the right to exist as an independent, democratic (small d ;-)), Jewish state there will never, ever be a hope for peace and stability in the Middle East. THAT is the clearest truth of all. Obama can give speeches and make proclamations until the next U.S. president replaces him, but the only change is that Israel's enemies now think they bear even less responsibility to seek peace or negotiate, and have the backing of the US president.

It saddens me, and in a way frightens me, that much of American Jewry seems willing to support a Middle East policy that offers no serious consequences to those that would seek Israel's destruction.
I love you, Sam, but I can't agree with you this time. Nor can I understand why anyone would think that Obama is a friend of Israel. He's not. His advisors are, for the most part, not. And because they're not, the security and continued existence of the Israel that I and many others love is now at greater risk than ever before.

!עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי (Long live the nation of Israel!)

An anonymous poster also commented:

There is a two state solution and the other state is called Jordan. The only justification for the state of Israel is the G-d gave the land of Israel to the Jewish people. This was the reason Harry Truman used in l948 for ratification of the existence of the State of Israel. Israel's neighbors refuse to recognize the existence of the state of Israel, and one cannot make peace with someone who does not even recognize your right to exist.

And, finally, there's my close friend, Chanan, a Russian Israeli, who had prophetically warned me about the consequences of a U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and who believes that President Obama is a closet Muslim, has no concern for Israel and will abandon and destroy the Jewish State because he does not understand that the Arabs will never recognize Israel's right to exist.

You should know that I respond with some trepidation. What I fear most is the possibility that I will suffer the same fate, the same ridicule that befell German Jews who defended the National Socialists in the early 1930's. If my analysis of what is transpiring, and what needs to occur, is in error, the consequences for my people are horrific. And so I ask myself repeatedly, "am I listening for what I want to hear from the Obama Administration or am I listening to what it is saying?"

I am listening to what President Obama is saying and, significantly, words matter with this president. I heard him stand up before his audience in Cairo and proclaim that peace was not achievable without the Arab nations' recognition of Israel and it's right to exist. I heard him admonish his hosts that they cannot hope to achieve the stability of the two-state solution without renouncing terrorism, controlling terrorists and cease the fomenting of hatred against the Jewish State. In effect, he spoke M's "clearest truth". This president is not an idiot. Words matter. He was not relieving the Arab states of responsibility. He was imposing responsibility as a condition of cooperation from the United States.

There were a couple of developments this past week that increased my comfort with my analysis. Vice President Biden was interviewed on Meet the Press on Sunday. The concerns of M and the anonymous commenter were addressed head on. Here's the transcript from the conversation David Gregory had with Vice President Biden on the subject of Israel and President Obama's position (thanks to RealClearPolitics for posting the transcript):

MR. GREGORY: Let me return to a couple of foreign policy notes...

VICE PRES. BIDEN: Sure.

MR. GREGORY: ...in our remaining moments. Israel. Is the president trying to distance himself from Israel in order to assuage the Arabs?

VICE PRES. BIDEN: Absolutely not. Look, here...

MR. GREGORY: If that's the case, then, why is this administration only making unconditional demands over settlements on Israel and on no other parties?

VICE PRES. BIDEN: Well, they are make--we are making demands. We're making demands both today...

MR. GREGORY: Unconditional demands.

VICE PRES. BIDEN: Look, look. The president of the United States, in his speech to the Islamic world and the Islamic communities, stood there and said--and it's a paraphrase, I don't know the exact quote--we are unconditionally tied to Israel. Israel's security is our security was in essence of what he said. So he made it clear we're not distancing ourself from Israel. What we say is that, look, what happened was all the parties signed onto a thing called the road map. It was the thing that everybody said that would bring, result in a two-state solution. The Israeli government signed onto that, the Palestinian Authority signed onto that, the Arab states blessed that. That's what we want to see happen. So we are moving all the parties as best we can toward keeping their part of the bargain.

MR. GREGORY: Yeah. But wait a minute, you were making an unconditional demand only on Israel and no other parties...

VICE PRES. BIDEN: No. No, we're not.

MR. GREGORY: ...over settlements. That's not the case?

VICE PRES. BIDEN: No, we're not. No, that's not the case. We are making...

MR. GREGORY: What unconditional demand has this president made on the Arabs?

VICE PRES. BIDEN: The unconditional demands we're making on the Palestinians that they have to provide security for Israel. They have to stop this, this, this, this baiting of their populations. They have to stop incitement. We've made it clear to the, to the Arab states, they have to do something more than just talk about normalizing relation with Israel.

MR. GREGORY: Is there moral equivalency in the fight between Israelis and Palestinians, in your view?

VICE PRES. BIDEN: No. No, there's not moral equivalency in...

MR. GREGORY: Did the president suggest there was in his speech?

VICE PRES. BIDEN: I don't believe the president did suggest that. What the, the president suggested is for the well-being of innocent Palestinians and Israelis, that what you need to do is you need a two-state solution along the lines that all the parties had heretofore agreed to, and we're going to use all of our diplomatic capability to move the parties toward actually implementing what they committed to.

Before you dismiss this as the unscripted musings of "Foot-in-Mouth" Biden (as some of my debate opponents have been doing this week), let me explain how things work. A lot of very intelligent, highly paid staffers at the White House, and the president himself, decide whether, where and with whom to put forth the Administration's positions on the Sunday news shows like Meet the Press. Anticipated subjects are reviewed. Answers are carefully crafted. Sometimes instructions are given not to make any statements contrary to the official position of the Administration. Sometimes, the interviewee is coached on how to address outstanding issues in order to make sure that a subject of controversy is covered in the manner POTUS wishes it to be covered. There is no way in Hell that the White House did not anticipate a question about the Administration's commitment to Israel after the Cairo speech. And, accordingly, there is no way in Hell that the Vice President's description of the "unconditional" demands being made on the Arabs was off the cuff rhetoric. He was delivering a message as instructed. Words matter.

The second event was Israeli's Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech in response to President Obama. For the first time, he acknowledged that, with conditions, he would accept the two-state solution he has long campaigned against. The conditions, appropriately, dealt with security issues. The conditions also dealt with the status of Jerusalem, not an insignificant obstacle. M, Chanan and others who challenged my views this week reminded me that, under Israeli jurisdiction since 1967, Jerusalem has been open to all faiths. Previously, while under Jordanian control, Jews were not allowed in the Old City. They fear a return to those exclusionary policies if the Israelis give up control and their concerns are understandable.

However, again, a fresh approach can bring about a compromise. President Obama welcomed Prime Minister Netanyahu's response as a good start. As with the need to control terrorists before there can be any hope of peace, the president recognizes that Jerusalem has to remain open to all faiths. He believes however, and I cannot imagine that he is wrong, that there are ways to assure such access even if the city is not under the exclusive control of the Israelis.

We have no choice but to try. Spare me the commentaries on the intolerance of Islam and the destruction of Jewish and Christian communities in Arab lands. I do not need to read more accounts of the subjugation of women in Arab communities or the seemingly barbaric imposition of Shariah law. I understand that these injustices have occurred and continue to occur. And, unfortunately from my point of view, it will be a long time, if ever, before those cultures change.

The tragedy would be to allow ourselves to be blinded by our abhorrence of such barbarism as we try to fashion peace with Israel. Our desire to establish peace and stability in the region is precisely for the purpose of allowing Israel to thrive as a democratic Jewish State without concern over the imposition of Islamic law in its territory. How Muslims treat one another in their own countries is besides the point as long as they recognize Israel's independence. As I noted last time, that is the starting block for the discussion imposed on the Islamic world by President Obama in Cairo.

Allow me a final comment on the anonymous commentator's observation about the Source of Israel's entitlement. My faith (philosophy, not religion) leads me to believe that God did give Israel to the Jewish people. My multi-cultural awareness puts me on notice that my faith is not universally shared. I am not willing to trust resolution of the conflict to hoping that (paraphrasing Yasser Arafat of all people) my imaginary Friend is more powerful than their imaginary Friend. Rather, I prefer to believe that God left a few untied ribbons dangling when he presented the package of Israel to the Jewish people and, as with so many other grants of free will, He is leaving it up to us to figure out how to tie up the loose ends.

!עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי