A transcript of this episode is available below.

Subscribe on all major platforms.

In this special series, TEXTing: IRL – Ideas for Real Life, Elana Stein Hain brings the big dilemmas facing North American Jews into conversation with classic and modern Torah texts.

Uncomfortable Gratitude: Deliverance from a Flawed Source – with Tamara Mann Tweel Transcript

Note: This is a lightly edited transcript of a conversation, please excuse any errors.

Elana: Hi, everyone. Welcome back to a special series of TEXTing, where we consider issues relevant to Jewish life through the lens of classical and modern Torah texts. I’m your host, Elana Stein Hain. We’re recording on July 7, 2025. If you’d like to follow along with today’s text, you can find the link to our source sheet in the show notes.

In this special mini-series called Texting IRL, Ideas for Real Life, we’re examining the dilemmas impacting American Jews at this time. In last episode, we spoke with Jacob Feinspahm about how progressive Jewish activists are dealing with the rise of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism on the left and how it impacts their political alliances.

This week, we’re going to be speaking about something quite different. About a month ago, I experienced deep cognitive dissonance myself. As I sat with many, many other Jews in our bunkers, kind of amazed at something that felt quite miraculous, to be honest. It felt like something we would have made a Chanukah or a Purim over in ancient times.

Here was Israel feeling so incredibly alone for the last two years. Here was Israel feeling its sense of existential danger so incredibly deeply. And then along comes an incredible, swift surprise attack on Iran by Israel. But more than that—the B2 bunker busters of the United States. We literally woke up that next morning, and it was some sort of state of amazement, euphoria, feeling that you were living through something historic. Just wow.

The Iranian existential threat is not something that people take with a grain of salt around here. It is real. And in that moment, regardless of what we find out afterwards, as to whether this has pushed it off the nuclear program a few months or a few years, it felt like something out of a movie, really, truly.

And who was the emissary of that salvation? None other than President Donald J. Trump, a man who just the other day used the word “Shylock” and claimed he didn’t know what it connoted. A person who many, many Jews feel quite uncomfortable with, not only because of his policies, but because of the way he conducts himself, and certainly because of his policies.

So I wonder to myself, where does it leave me to be sitting in a country that feels like it is possible that this person saved us? Saved, in some ways, the free world? Did something that other presidents were never willing to do? And yet this is not a person who I want to endorse. So I can’t think of anybody better to talk with me about this cognitive dissonance than Dr. Tamara Mann Tweel. Tamara, it is great to be with you.

Tamar: Elana, it is such a treat to be with you. It is really, I feel like, so lucky to spend this time learning with you.

Elana: Now, the reason why I have to have Tamara say something before I introduce her is because you can hear her smile through the audio. If people are listening just on audio, you can just hear the kindness in who you are, Tamara. And I will say that, yes, the reason why I invited you is because Tamara was previously the associate director of the Freedom and Citizenship Program at Columbia University. She founded Civic Spirit, an organization that inspires and empowers schools across faith traditions to enhance their civic knowledge, responsibility, and belonging in their student and faculty communities. She’s a research fellow at the Kogod Research Center at Hartman and senior program director at the Teagle Foundation specializing in civic initiatives.

In other words, Tamara has spent her life working on civic engagement, not partisan engagement, civic engagement. And I think this cognitive dissonance that I feel is a question of—what is my civic engagement in this moment, given that I have such strong partisan feelings? So thank you so much for being here, Tamar. Really, really, really.

I want us to jump right into the text because as soon as we started speaking, we realized that there’s two levels to this. And so we have two texts for this. The first level is really the question of how you thank someone you disagree with profoundly. And I want us to look at a sicha, an exposition from 1981, that the Lubavitcher Rebbe gave orally to his community when President Jimmy Carter lost the election after his first and only term in office.

Now, just to give people some background, growing up in an Orthodox family, Jimmy Carter was persona non grata. Jimmy Carter was a problem. So the idea that the Rebbe would take his sicha and actually talk about his gratitude to Carter when many Jews were actually just celebrating that Carter was no longer in office is absolutely fascinating. So Tamara, do you want to take us through it?

Tamara: It would be my pleasure, Elana, to read this. The relationship between Jimmy Carter and the Lubavitcher Rebbe is just an incredible, incredible American civic story. I’m going to read the Rebbe’s words from January 15, 1981.

“…But such is not the way of Torah. Notwithstanding any past mistakes, Torah bids us to be grateful, to acknowledge that good things which were done. In the eyes of Torah, to be an ingrate is a despicable thing, unworthy of any decent human being. And in the past administration, the outstanding achievement was the prevention of war. There were instances in the past four years which, before the endeavors of the president, could easily have led to war. Not only did he thus save millions of Americans from the horrors of such a consequence, but in all probability the rest of the world. And for this, he deserves our thanks and gratitude.”

Elana: Okay, so before we go on to the pivot that he’s about to make—which is, I said thank you, but I want to make sure you all know what I disagree with about what Carter has done—can you shed some light on what the issue was that he felt that Carter kept America from going to war? Do you have a sense of what we’re talking about here?

Tamara: Actually, it’s so funny. When I’m reading this now, I was thinking so much about the the Rebbe and Carter’s relationship in the late 1970s. And it just is, it’s really fascinating. I mean, Jimmy Carter was like the first president to light a public menorah. Abraham Shemtov had worked with, I think, Stuart Eizenstat, who was the domestic advisor for Carter, to make sure that there was a public menorah. There was like that religious story between them.

And then there’s this incredible story about the role of education in America, where Jimmy Carter and the Lubavitcher Rebbe are really trying to work together to, I think, reinvest America in the purpose of education. And it’s interesting to me that he could have offered gratitude for that. But I actually think he’s hitting on the most important pain point in Carter’s whole regime, which is the Iranian hostages.

Actually, even when Carter lights the menorah, he’s thinking of the hostages, could there still be any light? And it really, I think, affected him in such a profound way, and it probably cut short, which could have potentially been four more years. And I think everyone had so easily maligned Carter for that. He was just described as weak. And for the Rebbe to see that he was trying to prevent war and possibly did, I think was a gift to Carter that the Rebbe could see him in that way.

Elana: Wow. Well, I think there are two things here that are worth pointing out. One is what you’re saying, which is bucking the trend of how Carter was seen in this moment. And the second is actually not focusing on what he did for the Jews or the Rebbe that was helpful, but focusing on what he did for America that was helpful, is really interesting. Because then he pivots. Maybe let’s continue where he basically says, I want everybody to know what the big caveat is.

Tamara: Elana, this text is such a gift to me, and I hope, I know that we’ll come back to it as we go through these other texts. But I think the model of how to offer gratitude but not subsume your critique is so majestic in this text. And I have been thinking about it as just a personal model. And it’s not even a compliment sandwich. I have to… Maybe it is. Well, let’s see where it goes.

Elana: Right. Let’s keep reading.

Okay. Oh, and sorry. This is just such an elegant phrase: “A short note of caution is in order here.” Now we know we’re hitting a transition. I love it.

“The above acknowledgement is in no way to be construed as a retraction from my previous stand concerning the Camp David Accords. I reiterate as strongly as possible that it was and remains a disaster and peril for Jews and the rest of the world. The president’s part in the Accords was no doubt motivated by the hope that it would bring peace. And for this, he is to be commended. But the fact remains that all has been achieved is that one side has made numerous concessions, including giving up land and essential oil supplies for no substantive return whatsoever. Such concessions merely prompt demands for further concessions, creating an even greater danger to peace.

Elana: Well, I’ll tell you something interesting. Clearly, he was against the Accords with Egypt, right? That’s what we’re talking about here. He was against the Accords with Sadat. I have to tell you that not an hour ago, did an Israeli colleague tell me that he got back to Israel in the middle of the Iran war through Sharm al-Sheikh. And he said, “Thank God we have peace with the Egyptians. That was the only thing that allowed me to get back. And in fact, they gave me a guard.” When I was trying to drive from Sharm to Taba, they put a guard, an Egyptian guard, in my cab because they were worried about me going alone. So it’s just fascinating to see this in the backdrop of that.

But certainly, he does not subsume his critique. So I’m actually going to cut us off there and people who want to see the full letter can definitely look in the show notes and I urge you to do so. But I’m wondering, what do you make of the Rebbe’s approach in this moment? What do you make of the Rebbe’s approach here and how you think about it today?

Tamara: I had a very personally profound experience watching the leadership of Rachel GoldbergPolin over the last years.

Elana: I don’t know anyone who hasn’t.

Tamara: And I have to say, I was like really shaken to the core at the funeral of Hersh. And it was because of how she opened. And she opened in a way that I think taught me something about Hakarat Hatov that I really think the Rebbe is doing in this letter. And I’ll just read her words. I have to say, and when I saw this, and I’m sure everyone who’s listening to this podcast, when they saw it, I was really surprised. It surprised me to hear these words. And here’s what Rachel Goldberg Polin said:

“I am honest and I say, it is not that Hersh was perfect, but he was the perfect son for me. And I am so grateful to God and I want to do Hakarat Hatov and thank God right now for giving me this magnificent present of my Hersh. For 23 years, I was privileged to have this most stunning treasure, to be Hersh’s mama. I’ll take it and say thank you. I just wish it had been for longer.”

And when…

Elana: Whew.

Tamara: I know. And when she said this, I was like, this was the best, were one of the best moments of religious modeling I’d witnessed in my lifetime. Because it could have been an experience of only pain and agony. But then what I learned from her in this moment is that then you submit to the world just being pain and agony. Like you start to participate in the erasure of goodness. And that she opened with this form of Hakarat Hatov, like Hakarat Hatov as something you do in the midst of pain and suffering and agony, because that is never all of God’s world.

Elana: Wow.

Tamara: And to preserve that and to ensure that at the beginning of this eulogy, she was preserving the absolute beauty and gift of her son, and making sure that that goodness was recognized, was set out loud, that God was thanked for it. To me, that was like truly like a lesson.

And I think the Rebbe has that too. He had a complicated relationship with Carter. He’s obviously extremely concerned about what’s happening with Camp David. But if that was all he said, or if he said nothing, he would be allowing a single disagreement to erase the entire man or the entire public servant. And so he leaves room to not erase goodness, to name it.

Elana: Okay, so let’s think, it sounds like for you, there’s a disposition. There’s something, there’s a religious disposition that is able to have both gratitude and critique at the same time. And it also sounds like it’s a way of defending the possibility of continuing to move forward. What you’re saying is you can fall into the abyss otherwise. And we don’t want you falling into the abyss.

Tamara: It’s not only that I think you’re falling into like a psychological dark hole or the abyss as you said, I actually think what it does is participate in the deleting of God’s world because you stop being able to actually articulate moments of goodness. So it’s not just a psychological abyss, it’s a form of blindness.

Elana: I see. Wow. Wow.

Okay, so here’s my pushback. Here’s my pushback. I want to know is that applicable here? The reason why I’m asking is because we’re talking about Jimmy Carter and the Lubavitcher Rebbe. We’re talking about, I do think that Rachel Goldberg Polin’s decision to say that, thank you, that’s also her talking to God, right?

What I’m looking at right now is that I think part of this gratitude problem, it’s not just that it’s hard to hold gratitude and critique together, it’s that the gratitude is dangerous because I don’t want to endorse this man. It is such a flawed situation. He is so unqualified for where he is in the world. I don’t want to endorse him and I don’t want to fall into that. So what do we do with that? Because that to me is like it’s on steroids, this problem.

Tamara: I was thinking last night about this and I was reminded of being a student and taking a class on Thucydides.

Elana: Sure. It goes back to Thucydides.

Tamara: Well, I’ll tell you why I did because first of all, it’s an incredible document, Pericles’ funeral oration. It’s an incredible civic document about why we sacrifice and what sacrifice is for, but there’s a line in it that always haunted me and I was anticipating or feeling the energy of your pushback. And the line is this, this is Athenians, Pericles describing the greatness of Athens:

“In generosity, we are equally singular, acquiring our friends by conferring, not by receiving favors.”

And I used to think that was so beautiful. Oh my gosh, the Athenians, they’re so amazing. They just give gifts. And then I realized, no, that’s a big power move. That’s a huge power move. If you’re the one giving the gift, you have all the power. When you are the one receiving the gift, you are so easily manipulated. You are so easily in this position of fealty, of need, of… they just, and I think what you’re concerned about with gratitude in that way is that you will absolutely lose your capacity for your own personal discernment. Like your gratitude will start to overtake you and you will just become totally beholden. Like that, I think is the-

Elana: Yup. You got it. You got it. I actually, I want to bring another text that is not as old as Thucydides, but it is more to our Jewish point than Thucydides, I would put it. But there is also a civic element to it because I think, to me, it’s both the question of what you’re calling like fealty versus appreciation, the ability to discern.

And also, at some point, I want us to get to the tachlis question of—how am I supposed to woo somebody to give me what I need and also resist them and their policies at the same time? Meaning there’s also that layer. I just want to point out to our listeners, we have three layers here actually that we’re building.

The first is, can you hold gratitude alongside critique or are you, as Tamara says, going to erase the good by being incapable of gratitude? The second is, are you going to lose your sense of discernment because you fall so far into gratitude that you are just groveling, that’s where you are? And the third is, how do you actually do this on a practical level? Am I supposed to send a thank you email? Am I supposed to have kids in my school—I mean, I don’t run a school—but kids in my school send “thank you, President Trump” letters, the way that many people did when he moved the embassy? The way that many people did during the Abraham Accords? Like that’s another piece, but maybe we’ll have to jump into the text or you have something you want to say first.

Tamara:
Let’s jump into the text, but promise me after the text, I want to pause on this woo question.

Elana: Oh, we’re getting to the wooing. We’re getting to the wooing. Okay, let’s do that. Let’s do this. So let’s take a look. We are looking at the Gemara, the Talmud, in Avodah Zara, pages, it really spans for pages, it’s 10A, 10B, a little bit of 11A, and we’re going to basically summarize it for you. Again, it’s in the notes. It’s about Rebbe, Rabbi Judah the Prince, who is our rabbinic patriarch, known as the editor of the Mishnah. This is a person who had, he was a man of means. He represents the Jewish people, right? He represents the Jewish people at that time.

And then we have Antoninos, who people think was Emperor Caracalla, same time around as Rabbi Judah the Prince. Eh, not the worst emperor, not the best emperor in terms of violence and things like that, but the Talmud describes how well they got along. And to be honest, it starts with this great conversation about, “Well, you know, Rebbe, I want to be able to have my son lead after me, but I also want to be able to make the Jewish colony in Tiberius tax-free. And if I ask my Senate, they’ll only let me do one. So what should I do?”

So Rebbe gives him really clever advice, which is essentially ask the Senate to make your son dynastic follower to you as the emperor and tell him to give a tax break to Tiberius. So it sounds like he’s starting off as, you know, I’m in it for the Jewish people, but as you go on, it starts getting like they’re just a little too close. They’re just, they’re a little too close.

It’s not just that they’re a little too close. There’s a secret cave between, you know, I’m serious, this secret cave between Antoninus’ house and Rebbe’s house, but nobody’s allowed to be in the cave when Antoninus comes. In fact, what Antoninus does is he puts a guard at the mouth, one mouth of the cave and a guard at the other mouth of the cave and kills those guards at the end of every day so that nobody knows that he came to visit Rebbe, right? Something got a little mixed up here and they get a little too close.

And I want to read a couple of the lines that I think implicate Rebbe here in a way that actually in other interactions between them, he’s not implicated. So it goes like this. It describes, “Amar lei,” Antoninus asks Rebbe, “ateina l’alma de’atei?” Am I going to go to the world to come?”

“Amar lei,” so what does Rebbe say to him? Now I want you to think about this. This is a man who’s murdering two guards every day just to see Rebbe. So he’s a murderer, right? I can’t imagine what else he’s doing above ground.

So Rebbe turns to him and says, “in,” yes, you are going to the world to come.

“Amar lei,” so he says back, “ve-haketiv lo yihiyeh sarid le-beit Esav?” Isn’t there a verse in your Bible that says that there won’t be any remnant to the house of Esau? And I’m Rome, and we’re the house of Esau in your literature? So the response is, “Be-oseh ma’aseh Esav,” only if you behave like Esav.”

Now this is a very interesting moment because is this Rebbe’s way, as my colleague Josh Levisohn said to me, is this Rebbe’s way of subtly saying to Antoninus, “Hey, I’d love for you to act a little bit better and not act like Esav.” Or is this Rebbe not doing what he’s supposed to do, which is say, “Well, if you stop murdering people, then maybe you can get to the world to come. You got to stop what you got to stop.”

And furthermore, on Avodah Zarah 11a, we literally see the verse where Rebecca is told, “Vayomer hashem lah,” God says to her, “shnei goyim be-vitnekh,” you have two nations in your room.” This is a reference to Jacob and Esau, right? And now they’re going to make it into a reference to Rebbe and Antoninus, like they’re twins, like they’re besties, right?

“Amar Rav Yehudah amar Rav,” Rav Yehudah says in the name of Rav, “al tikru goyim,” it’s not, “There are two nations in your room,” “elah gei-im,” “There are two proud ones in your room.” Who are the two proud ones? Zeh Antoninus v’ Rebbe. Antoninus and Rebbe, two proud ones. Why? “Shelo pascum me-aal shulchanam, lo chazeret velo kishot ve-lo tznon,” because they always had the best vegetables and herbs on their table.

Meaning, I want you to imagine what started off with, “how can we get Tiberius to be tax-free for Jews?” Ends with Rebbe and Antoninus sitting at their lavish table, being a little too close with Rebbe promising the world to come to Antoninus. And I look at this and I say, “If it can happen to Rebbe, it can happen to anybody.” Right? So I’m a little worried about, it’s not just discernment, it’s, I’ll let you go back to your wooing. Right? There’s also a wooing there that needs to happen in order to get someone on your side.

Tamara: Can we slow this down a little bit?

Elana: We must.

Tamara: What do you think happens to Rebbe? Like, if you are telling the story, not of the facts of the Gemara, but like the emotional facts, like what story do you tell yourself about how this happens to a leader?

Elana: I’m getting the emperor to see the truth. I’m getting him to see that you want to go to the world to come. I’m working with him incrementally. I have his ear. I have to be here in order to have his ear. These are all things that I think, you know, I totally understand.

Tamara: I think what you’re describing is so interesting to me. I was really sticking on this word, “wooing,” when you said it. I was thinking about what a different word it is from gratitude. It’s such an instrumentalist word, right? You’re making yourself so attractive. You’re making the relationship so attractive for this very instrumental end. You woo to be loved, or in this case, you woo in the beginning to help your people.

But it has such an extreme instrumentalist end that when it happens, you become totally enamored or overly dependent on your own power. Like, “I got this thing done because I wooed. To get the next thing done, I must continue to woo.” And I think the instrumentalism of that emotive response can give a very, very dangerous—and I love this with the radish and the cucumber—it can give you a dangerous inflation of your own power.

And I actually think this is a slightly adjacent, emotional story than the one the Rebbe’s doing with Carter.

Elana: Oh, I think you are right, especially because, now, you can correct me if I’m wrong, but Carter being out of office is actually the perfect time to kick him. He’s down. Meaning, if there’s no need to woo, and it’s not actually about gratitude, I don’t need this anymore. We’re done. We’re done.

But I do think the reality, what I appreciate very much about what you’re saying, is that sometimes the reality of needing to, let’s say, lobby. Okay? The reality of needing to lobby. How do you keep lobbying from turning into wooing, we might say?

And I’m going to say it because I experienced the difference between them as—lobbying is a recognition that I am not twins with this person, and actually, I am asking them for help because I know that I don’t hold all the cards, and I’m aware of that, and I know I have to be vigilant and not lose sight of the fact that I hold all the cards. Whereas, this wooing situation feels a little bit more like I need to get into their inner circle and be with them and manipulate in the way that I know how. Right? And it could be, I’m just experiencing a spectrum of how a person might engage during this time.

Tamara: Yes. And I think it is the essential danger of power. This, to me, just seems like such an essential risk. And this is a risk in any democracy. You’re supposed to advocate. You’re supposed to build relationships. You should use the power you have in a self-governing society like you should run for office. You should meet people who run for office. You should write letters. You should do all the things. He’s doing what he should be doing. You know what I mean? This is probably his job. But the moment of discernment is what protections do we have internally and what protections do we have communally when you’ve crossed the line?

The tunnel for me, that moment of the tunnel in the text is you have crossed the line. First of all, it’s secret. It’s so secret that now you know you’re engaged, and you know, they’re murdering the guard after every day. You’ve now—in and of itself, there is something sort of corrupt and it’s hard to believe necessary.

Elana: Tamara, it’s worse. Rebbe’s told that he’s not allowed to have anybody there. And one day he has Rabbi Chanina Bar-Chama there and basically the emperor gives him a test to see if he’s going to be able to live. And ultimately he squeaks through by the skin of his teeth. I mean, he really does by miracle. And then Antoninus is like, “I told you I don’t want anybody here when I come here. I don’t want to see that again.” Right? So he was helping fellow Jews and then suddenly he’s endangering the Jews.

Tamara: He’s not.

Elana: Right. I mean, I think, look, I basically would say to you, if you were to give me like tachlis, you’re a Jew who actually experiences the help that the United States and specifically President Trump gave to Israel with Iran as something not short of historic, really. And you continue to resist his domestic policy, his domestic agenda, let’s say. What do I do? I sit in my house and I say, “Oh, I so appreciate that he did that.” Let’s just talk about it for a minute. Let’s just talk about it. Right? To me, it’s actually trying to move beyond just partisanship to civic engagement. Like really. And correct me if you think I’m using those terms incorrectly.

Tamara: No, you’re using them fine because those terms now mean everything and nothing.

Elana: Oh, okay. Perfect. So you use them fine because they’re meaningless.

Tamara: Yeah, wield them how you’d like, but I’d like to use terms that are more precise and concrete for people.

Elana: I want to hear it.

Tamara: So I want to talk with you a little bit about what stops us from seeing clearly. And I think we have a situation right now in our country where it is very easy to either totally malign or to totally adore. And both, I think you’ve sacrificed your capacity to see clearly because I think the religious discipline that we’re discussing is that it is not the case that even people who do lots of bad things can never do a good thing, nor is it the case that people who do mostly good things can never do a bad thing. And it’s not the case that once they do that other thing, it erases everything else.

Elana: Right. Or that it fundamentally changes their path in the future.

Tamara: No, like we can’t judge in that way. We can’t judge so swiftly and clearly because life doesn’t allow for that. And I wonder if what we need to do is actually create like a very different practice. I mean, I’ve been thinking about this, like the essential religious discipline is one of discernment. Like how do you distinguish night from day? I really mean that. It is an incredibly difficult thing to do, but it is not something that you do by making flippant remarks. It’s something you do by actually exercising very serious discernment.

And I think in this case, if you have discerned that something good has happened, you need to say that. Otherwise you are allowing all the bad to erase the good. And I think like you have to say it. I am grateful for this. I’m grateful for it. But then I like the double paragraph of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. What’s that wonderful line he has when he makes the transition?

Elana: Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. What’s the word?

Tamara: Oh, “a short note of caution is in order here.”

Elana: A short note of caution.

Tamara: I love that. Why can’t we make an actual practice, of offering gratitude when we really see goodness and then following that up with a short note of caution here? I am incredibly upset and feel like it is morally wrong and then give the list of those things. And I don’t find that dangerous. I find that an incredible civic exercise.

Elana: So I think this is an incredible place to stop because I think what you’ve given us is you’ve given us the differences between lobbying and wooing, you’ve given us the difference between fealty and gratitude. You’ve given us a religious posture.

What I will say is—this is actually—where we land now is on the note of caution is actually the perfect segue to our next episode. Because in our next episode, we’re going to be looking at people who are very much aligning themselves with more conservative values and with a more Republican bent and engagement and how they deal with the notes of caution that have to come with those right now. Because even if they signed up for, “We want to deal with immigration,” they didn’t want it to look like this. Or even if they signed up for, “We want to deal with anti-Semitism,” they didn’t necessarily want that to cut funding for medical research. So I think this note of caution is deserving of a whole conversation in and of itself.

Tamara: Can I say something too? Because you brought me on here as a civic educator.

Elana: Yes.

Tamara: I just want to say that it is an incredible gift of living in a democracy that you are allowed to offer gratitude and not fealty and offer true critique without complete malignance. When we exercise that, when we exercise that capacity to discern history and discern our understanding of what’s happening with our public servants and people in power, it is just an extraordinary gift of living in this country. And I feel like we should, first of all, not squander it, but I also feel like we should exercise it a lot.

You’re talking about letters. I think we should write as many letters of gratitude as we do of critique, and we should reference them both. Last month, I sent you this wonderful letter thanking you. And this month, I really want to talk to you about this thing that’s bothering me. I just feel like that constant exercise is one of the gifts of being an American.

Elana: Wow. That’s a great way to end. Tamara, thank you so much for giving us a more capacious view.

Tamara: Thank you too. Lots of love, friend. Be well.