Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: corporations as persons

Expand Messages
  • William
    Message 1 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
      >
      > Bill,
      >
      > So pro FN you're opposed to democracy, and contra FN you are a nationalist but with the modern twist of being neo-colonialist?!
      >
      > Mary
      >Yes,Mary and I know world peace is unatainable and Santa is a lie. Bill
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
      > > >
      > > > Mary
      > > >Mary, in a meeting with a Danish minister I discussed the balance looked for in a fair and productive social system. That was two years ago and he preferred the european ,socialist model. With the economic news from Europe his model appears left of perfect. Obama had shifted toward the euroipean model but now he has to defend his vision against more private models. Bill
      > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Bill,
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
      > > > >
      > > > > Irvin
      > > > >
      > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > forgot to include the link
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/#significant
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > Mary, as the link mentions corporate lawyers sponsered these legal initiatives and at the writing of the constitution american jurisprudence had no notion of corporations. The bill of rights was written for the citizens of the US and the transferance of personal rights to business entities was a dilution of individual rights for the benefit of the rich. If you wish to discern the direction of Romneys presidency you could have no further evidence than his cleving to such legal concepts. It would be interesting to see what Obama ,a constitutional lawyer, might say about this matter. I guess he would dodge the question and then we could judge just how far inside he has become. Bill
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • Mary
      But, Bill, my question is rhetorical and an attempt to understand your position from a existentialist point of view. Your comment is an insult and lacks any
      Message 2 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        But, Bill, my question is rhetorical and an attempt to understand your position from a existentialist point of view. Your comment is an insult and lacks any basis. Mary

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Bill,
        > >
        > > So pro FN you're opposed to democracy, and contra FN you are a nationalist but with the modern twist of being neo-colonialist?!
        > >
        > > Mary
        > >Yes,Mary and I know world peace is unatainable and Santa is a lie. Bill
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
        > > > >
        > > > > Mary
        > > > >Mary, in a meeting with a Danish minister I discussed the balance looked for in a fair and productive social system. That was two years ago and he preferred the european ,socialist model. With the economic news from Europe his model appears left of perfect. Obama had shifted toward the euroipean model but now he has to defend his vision against more private models. Bill
        > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Bill,
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Irvin
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > forgot to include the link
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/#significant
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Mary, as the link mentions corporate lawyers sponsered these legal initiatives and at the writing of the constitution american jurisprudence had no notion of corporations. The bill of rights was written for the citizens of the US and the transferance of personal rights to business entities was a dilution of individual rights for the benefit of the rich. If you wish to discern the direction of Romneys presidency you could have no further evidence than his cleving to such legal concepts. It would be interesting to see what Obama ,a constitutional lawyer, might say about this matter. I guess he would dodge the question and then we could judge just how far inside he has become. Bill
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      • William
        Message 3 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
          >
          > But, Bill, my question is rhetorical and an attempt to understand your position from a existentialist point of view. Your comment is an insult and lacks any basis. Mary
          > Mary, your question was a set up so put it wherever it fits. I will not agree with it but if you wish to follow some agenda it is a free sight. Bill
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Bill,
          > > >
          > > > So pro FN you're opposed to democracy, and contra FN you are a nationalist but with the modern twist of being neo-colonialist?!
          > > >
          > > > Mary
          > > >Yes,Mary and I know world peace is unatainable and Santa is a lie. Bill
          > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Mary
          > > > > >Mary, in a meeting with a Danish minister I discussed the balance looked for in a fair and productive social system. That was two years ago and he preferred the european ,socialist model. With the economic news from Europe his model appears left of perfect. Obama had shifted toward the euroipean model but now he has to defend his vision against more private models. Bill
          > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > Bill,
          > > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > Irvin
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > forgot to include the link
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/#significant
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Mary, as the link mentions corporate lawyers sponsered these legal initiatives and at the writing of the constitution american jurisprudence had no notion of corporations. The bill of rights was written for the citizens of the US and the transferance of personal rights to business entities was a dilution of individual rights for the benefit of the rich. If you wish to discern the direction of Romneys presidency you could have no further evidence than his cleving to such legal concepts. It would be interesting to see what Obama ,a constitutional lawyer, might say about this matter. I guess he would dodge the question and then we could judge just how far inside he has become. Bill
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • Mary
          It s certainly not a set-up but a question as to whether you agree with FN regarding nationalism and democracy and whether you consider yourself a
          Message 4 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            It's certainly not a set-up but a question as to whether you agree with FN regarding nationalism and democracy and whether you consider yourself a neo-colonialist. Mary

            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
            > >
            > > But, Bill, my question is rhetorical and an attempt to understand your position from a existentialist point of view. Your comment is an insult and lacks any basis. Mary
            > > Mary, your question was a set up so put it wherever it fits. I will not agree with it but if you wish to follow some agenda it is a free sight. Bill
            > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > > Bill,
            > > > >
            > > > > So pro FN you're opposed to democracy, and contra FN you are a nationalist but with the modern twist of being neo-colonialist?!
            > > > >
            > > > > Mary
            > > > >Yes,Mary and I know world peace is unatainable and Santa is a lie. Bill
            > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > Mary
            > > > > > >Mary, in a meeting with a Danish minister I discussed the balance looked for in a fair and productive social system. That was two years ago and he preferred the european ,socialist model. With the economic news from Europe his model appears left of perfect. Obama had shifted toward the euroipean model but now he has to defend his vision against more private models. Bill
            > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > Bill,
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > Irvin
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > forgot to include the link
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/#significant
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > Mary, as the link mentions corporate lawyers sponsered these legal initiatives and at the writing of the constitution american jurisprudence had no notion of corporations. The bill of rights was written for the citizens of the US and the transferance of personal rights to business entities was a dilution of individual rights for the benefit of the rich. If you wish to discern the direction of Romneys presidency you could have no further evidence than his cleving to such legal concepts. It would be interesting to see what Obama ,a constitutional lawyer, might say about this matter. I guess he would dodge the question and then we could judge just how far inside he has become. Bill
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • William
            Message 5 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
              >
              > It's certainly not a set-up but a question as to whether you agree with FN regarding nationalism and democracy and whether you consider yourself a neo-colonialist. Mary
              >Mary, I have never been a colonist unless you would consider the leased property in Quintana Roo such a gambit. The only neoactivity I have engaged in is in Neoex. I do not know what FN said about those very broad subjects. I am a democrat and have had nationalistic ideas. Bill
              > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > But, Bill, my question is rhetorical and an attempt to understand your position from a existentialist point of view. Your comment is an insult and lacks any basis. Mary
              > > > Mary, your question was a set up so put it wherever it fits. I will not agree with it but if you wish to follow some agenda it is a free sight. Bill
              > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Bill,
              > > > > >
              > > > > > So pro FN you're opposed to democracy, and contra FN you are a nationalist but with the modern twist of being neo-colonialist?!
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Mary
              > > > > >Yes,Mary and I know world peace is unatainable and Santa is a lie. Bill
              > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Mary
              > > > > > > >Mary, in a meeting with a Danish minister I discussed the balance looked for in a fair and productive social system. That was two years ago and he preferred the european ,socialist model. With the economic news from Europe his model appears left of perfect. Obama had shifted toward the euroipean model but now he has to defend his vision against more private models. Bill
              > > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
              > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > Bill,
              > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
              > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > Irvin
              > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@> wrote:
              > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
              > > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > > > forgot to include the link
              > > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > > > http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/#significant
              > > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > > > Mary, as the link mentions corporate lawyers sponsered these legal initiatives and at the writing of the constitution american jurisprudence had no notion of corporations. The bill of rights was written for the citizens of the US and the transferance of personal rights to business entities was a dilution of individual rights for the benefit of the rich. If you wish to discern the direction of Romneys presidency you could have no further evidence than his cleving to such legal concepts. It would be interesting to see what Obama ,a constitutional lawyer, might say about this matter. I guess he would dodge the question and then we could judge just how far inside he has become. Bill
              > > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • irvhal
              Mary, I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural
              Message 6 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Mary,

                I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural relationships between or among actual persons for efficacious marshaling of their own resources for some common purpose -- be it economic, social, political, or otherwise. (Note if you will, that a nonprofit corporation's right to disseminate speech was affirmed in the Citizens United case.) It is concededly undemocratic or unsocialistic, in that it presupposes voluntarism of action and association, rather than demanding submission and comformity to some supermajority at large. And it presupposes like action for others, and hence too that power is defused rather than concentrated in any singular person, organization or party. Second, to say that voter ID laws (or for that matter, any formal registration scheme) might lower voter turnout is to but acknowledge that life has opportunity costs and trade-offs. Stated differently, some people do prefer sports or kitsch to politics or expending time for a voter ID card, and the growing risks of voter fraud and free riding from porous borders do beckon a more vigilant registration scheme.

                Irvin

                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
                >
                > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
                >
                > Mary
                >
                > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Bill,
                > >
                >
                > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
                > >
                > > Irvin
              • William
                Message 7 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Mary,
                  >
                  > I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural relationships between or among actual persons for efficacious marshaling of their own resources for some common purpose -- be it economic, social, political, or otherwise. (Note if you will, that a nonprofit corporation's right to disseminate speech was affirmed in the Citizens United case.) It is concededly undemocratic or unsocialistic, in that it presupposes voluntarism of action and association, rather than demanding submission and comformity to some supermajority at large. And it presupposes like action for others, and hence too that power is defused rather than concentrated in any singular person, organization or party. Second, to say that voter ID laws (or for that matter, any formal registration scheme) might lower voter turnout is to but acknowledge that life has opportunity costs and trade-offs. Stated differently, some people do prefer sports or kitsch to politics or expending time for a voter ID card, and the growing risks of voter fraud and free riding from porous borders do beckon a more vigilant registration scheme.
                  >
                  > Irvin
                  > Irvin, The first time I voted I was shocked when I was simply asked my name and voted on my own recognisance. In my very contrary ,young mind, I was counting the holes in the security system. It is nearly wide open and can be beaten so many ways. Years later as a poll watcher I suspended voting when pre and post voting voters were interviewed togeather. The ward captain hated me for years. Since we are made to fill out a census form I might think it manditory that all vote and possess necessary credentials ,free of course, before national elections. If you really want honest,accurate elections that is a way to get there. Then that is not what a few influential people want. Bill
                  > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
                  > >
                  > > Mary
                  > >
                  > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Bill,
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
                  > > >
                  > > > Irvin
                  >
                • Mary
                  Irvin, The current issue concerns corporations having equal standing with individuals in the courts but having disproportionate resources. Free speech in the
                  Message 8 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Irvin,

                    The current issue concerns corporations having equal standing with individuals in the courts but having disproportionate resources. Free speech in the public domain is of course a civil right.

                    There is a growing body of research that supports the contention that minorities, the elderly, and students who tend to vote Democratic will definitely be disenfranchised. I can provide sources if you like.

                    Mary

                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Mary,
                    >
                    > I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural relationships between or among actual persons for efficacious marshaling of their own resources for some common purpose -- be it economic, social, political, or otherwise. (Note if you will, that a nonprofit corporation's right to disseminate speech was affirmed in the Citizens United case.) It is concededly undemocratic or unsocialistic, in that it presupposes voluntarism of action and association, rather than demanding submission and comformity to some supermajority at large. And it presupposes like action for others, and hence too that power is defused rather than concentrated in any singular person, organization or party. Second, to say that voter ID laws (or for that matter, any formal registration scheme) might lower voter turnout is to but acknowledge that life has opportunity costs and trade-offs. Stated differently, some people do prefer sports or kitsch to politics or expending time for a voter ID card, and the growing risks of voter fraud and free riding from porous borders do beckon a more vigilant registration scheme.
                    >
                    > Irvin
                    >
                    > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
                    > >
                    > > Mary
                    > >
                    > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Bill,
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
                    > > >
                    > > > Irvin
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.