“NO FOREIGN INFLUENCE”
by Cody Robert Judy, ©2015, blogging at CodyJudy
(Feb. 23, 2015) — As the backdoor is closed on Hollywood’s Oscar night and Lady GaGa was quoted by a dear friend and former Mrs. Utah and runner up to Mrs. America Rachelle Clements as having ‘shed the meat suit’ and wowed us with a surprisingly thrilling ‘Rodgers and Hammerstein score’ from The Sound of Music, a testament of talent in many different costumes, they have indeed lobbied for anti pirating warnings and penalties going to a great effort to sure up their copyrights were protected even though pirates and the definition of pirating though mentioned is not spelled out in the United States Constitution directly. So, why can’t Hollywood understand the differences of “U.S. Citizen” spelled out as a qualification for U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators from the “natural born Citizen” requirement spelled out for the Office of the President?
Indeed, the Hollywood and Entertainment lobby and others have pushed with so much foreign theft going on of their products for stricter protections of their data property. In 2012 a new federal regulation regarding the FBI’s Anti-Piracy Warning (APW) Seal took effect on August 13, 2012. The new 41 CFR Section 128-1.5009 authorizes use of the APW Seal by all U.S. copyright holders, subject to specific conditions of use. Copyrighted works can include, but are not limited to, films, audio recordings, electronic media, software, books, photographs, etc. The seal demonstrates the words clearly echoing the standards of “Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity” and I think raises serious questions to even potential candidates like Sen. Rand Paul, Sen. Ted Cruz and Sen. Marco Rubio as to even being competent to the duties of the President to ‘preserve, protect, and defend’ the U.S. Constitution.
It’s a fair question, “Where would Hollywood be if all their talent, all their time, and all their products were just pirated out of the U.S. by pirates and sold or ‘redistributed’ for the Pirates own profit? One could say there is no protected U.S. interest dearer than ‘property’. The conundrum question is why would Hollywood want to set up a pirate in the Office of the President to do just that when it came to their own property they had fought so hard for?
This essentially spells out exactly why ‘natural born Citizen’ was inserted as a higher standard for the Office of the President which was not exacted for the offices of Representatives and Senators that actually allows foreign influence by birth place or parent(s). And also why when the higher standard is diluted, watered down, or hypothesized as succinct to ‘citizen’ that an act of Constitutional Piracy is going on. This helps one identify pirates or candidates attempting to steal from your rights, also not expressly defined in the Constitution but well understood. After all what is ‘free speech’? Something you heard and didn’t pay for? Something you said and impossibly didn’t spend any calories on? We could go on, but that is exactly the ridiculous argument that flows from security through obscurity – the ability to obscure that which is in plain sight and understood.
Indeed it is not a testament of isolationism our Founders and Framers were afraid of as leniency for foreigners was provided in many important offices including both houses of Congress and all the Courts whose qualification for offices did not require being a ‘natural born Citizen’, but rather ‘Citizen’ with time specifications differing. In fact, even the Office of the President was at one time able to be divested upon some form of alienship as was included in the Constitution for the Office of the President as is stated in Art II, Sect. I Clause 5, “Or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution.”
Amid a flurry of eight attempts to change even since 2003 but steadfastly enduring has been the national security protection that charged two full generations must pass an individual’s history free of foreign influence before being qualified for the Office of the President excepting those as stated above.
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;”
Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents meets the no foreigner-state-of-person defining the difference between those who were born in foreign lands and to foreign parents who are welcomed as Citizens and able to hold very high offices in the U.S. Government but are not qualified because of the single generational status caused by either a foreign place of birth or a foreign parental influence. Considering the “Welcome Mat” of Americans winning elections in Foreign States, I’d say America has a very beautiful red carpet that is stunning for most willing to come through the front door and stick around.
See the video and read the rest here.
In 1790, under the Act of Congress a person born to two (2) U.S. Citizen parents was born a U.S. natural born Citizen anywhere in the world under the newly established uniform Rule of U.S. Citizenship & naturalization which provides still today; “Once a person is a U.S. Citizen, then so too are their children, at birth or otherwise.”
There were only two (2) forms of U.S. Citizenship at that time, a “citizen” being a 1st generation U.S. Citizen by an “naturalizing event”. The 1st of such an event was the Ratification of the COTUS which collectively naturalized ALL existing State Citizens, and no others. Thereafter naturalization was individually initiated under the processes set out in the 1790 Act eventually culminating with a Judicially administered taking of Oath and the naturalizing event being recorded.
The 2nd form was / is that of a person born to two (2) U.S. Citizen parents being born as a U.S. natural born Citizen. This specific form of U.S. Citizenship was entirely unavoidable given that a woman / wife / mother was considered as the same political character as her, (1st), father, then (2nd), her husband under the doctrine of “coverture”, which continued until the 1922 Cable Act. Therefore, ALL children born to the wife of a married U.S. Citizen father was born to two (2) U.S. Citizen parents anywhere in the world between March 1790 and January 1795.
There are ONLY two (2) circumstances that have had an “incidental legal effect” upon the circumstances of the birth of a U.S. natural born Citizen. The 1st being the “repeal” of the “1790 born out of the limits of the U.S. natural born Citizen provision” by the 1795 Act, thereafter limiting the birth of a U.S. natural born Citizen to anywhere EXCEPT “out of the limits of the U.S.”
The second (2nd) “incidental legal effect” occurred with the passing of the Cable Act in 1922 shortly after the Ratification of the 19th Amendment providing women with suffrage rights in national elections. The Cable Acts alternate title explains the effect that abrogated the doctrine of coverture, i.e., the Women’s Independent Citizenship and Citizenship retention Act. The Act did not speak to or in any manner seek to reconcile the previously unavoidable birth circumstances of a U.S. natural born Citizen, but rather allowed for a new unavoidable circumstance of birth to occur that had previously been a legal impossibility as far as U.S. Citizenship was concerned, i.e., “dual-citizenship” at birth.
THESE are the ACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES that speak to the nature of a U.S. natural born Citizen as identified and REQUIRED at A2S1C5 of the COTUS and any inquiry into a U.S. natural born Citizen that does not reconcile these circumstances is attempting to ‘legislate” rather than “construe” that which already is “legislated”