A Prisoner Of Love

…AKA A STICKLER FOR DETAIL

I have enjoyed, in my retirement days in the sun in my old hometown in Southern California, some bursts of nostalgia, in the form of ''oldies but goodies' on CDs.  I have collected quite a rack of them (actually, a small box full), online from an outfit called Publishers Clearing House.  I forget how I came across them; most probably from their advertising on some site I was visiting, of a way to make a small fortune in their Lotto-like periodic draws.   (They had hit on this way to flog more than magazines, have a whole range of household items for sale, with the 'draw' of the thrill of a possible big score on their very large Giveaways.)  The odds are something like one in a billion; but I was interested enough1 to peruse their offerings; and hence my collection of various said items, including a number of CDs from The Good Old Days.   

Among them was, is,  a 3CD Set of 'The World's Greatest Crooners'; and thereby hangs my tale.

These crooners of days gone by were Frank Sinatra, Nat 'King' Cole, and Perry Como; and I have enjoyed their numbers on this set very much.  Except for one seemingly small, niggling detail; and every time I hear it, in replays of that collection while preparing, and eating, my evening meal.  On 'Prisoner of Love,' Perry makes a mistake of emphasis on one line.  The lines in question are:

'She can have another, but I can't have another, because I'm not free…'  

Logically (and as sung correctly on another collection of O's but G's I ordered from the PCH - called 'Moonlight In Vermont: The Great Pop Standards' - by Gordon MacRae), the emphasis in the line 'but I can't have another' should be on the 'I'.   But Perry sings it - and twice, no less - with the emphasis on the 'can't'.    

A small thing, you are no doubt saying.  Nothing to get so worked up about, as to have it bother you, each time you hear it.  

Well, maybe not you.  But it bothers me.  (With the emphasis on the 'me'.)

Because it is wrong.  

And now we come to the gist of my little essay on such seemingly little things.

The Framers of the American Constitution - gathered in the sweltering heat of the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia -  in deciding on the 'little details' of the birth of a new nation, conceived in the basic spirit of what Benjamin Franklin called 'essential liberty,'2 inserted, in coming up with the eligibility requirements for a candidate for the presidential office, the following words:

"No person except a natural born Citizen…"

What did they mean by that expression?

It was obvious to them - and should be to us, taken in the context.  The context, including a proposal at the Convention by Alexander Hamilton to have the 'citizen' requirement read, simply, 'citizen' - which option was specifically turned down by the Framers, in favor of the more stringent requirement proposed by John Jay (in a letter to the Chair of the Proceedings, one G. Washington) for that office, in the context of that person as well becoming the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces: for that person to have NO DUAL/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES.  It was this concern that prompted the delegates to choose the more stringent requirement for the office.  Which required - and does to this day - the candidate to be born on the soil (jus soli is the judicial term) of two (in this case, U.S.) citizen parents (jus sanguinis).  Thus, no naturalized citizen can hold the presidential office.

Nor dual citizen.

Like Obama.3

And now we come right down to it:

A Prisoner of Love - in this case, of both Truth and of his country - requires the true American to uphold the Constitution.

Or there is no rule of law in the country.

There is just hell to pay.  

And we will, as a nation, divided against itself.

Oh, how we will.

And, judging by all the signs of preparation that the - illegal - Obama administration is and has been making:

very soon now.

Unless we choose to take on a transformative moment.  A real "transformation".  That is to say, to go neither to the Left nor to the Right.

But Up.

(The 'Right' has sown the seeds for this face-off, in its dialectical excesses.  Mostly by the Zionist NeoCons, in their Machiavellian-machination attempts to fasten American hegemony on the world; and thus to take it over, in their Grand Strategy for Power Over Others, and planetary control.  Which the Marxian-Muslim putsch for power under Obama is a reaction to, as part of the historical dialectic going on.  And thus, by its Completion character, bringing the entire process to a head, and close; for Next Steps, on another, higher level.

Another detail, to look at, in these pages, at some point.)

---

footnotes:

1 because of hoping for ways to be able to provide more monies to my political choices - in this election year in particular - to help the nation engage in a 'midcourse correction,' and stop going down the road towards civil war that we are on; caused by the hardcore Marxists amongst us having commandeerd the high ground in America via the - illegal - Obama administration, and a compliant Congress, clearly not up to the job at hand.

     Another story.  

2 The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."  (emphasis mine)

3 Now, for all the public knows - because the birth certificate copy that he provided to the public (on the official White House website) has proven to be a forgery (and a not very good one at that, adding insult to injury) - he could, in fact, very well be a 'natural born' citizen; since we don't know, really, who either of his parents were.  But because of all the lying and deceit and chicanery that has been going on regarding his birth records, he has disqualified himself anyway.  

     Incidentally, to note that some online Obots have tried to argue that the NBC term only rules out naturalized citizens.  This perspective on the matter not only falls on its face value - a dual citizen is equally, if not more so, subject to the pressures of DUAL/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES as a naturalize citizen - but is based on the idea that the constitutional Framers were going by English common law (which, in fact, only talks about natural born subjects; which these free and independent, newly-enfranchised Americans certainly no longer considered themselves to be).  The salient legalistic document that they were going by - and which they were known to be familiar with - is Emer de Vattel's The Law of Nations Or The Principles of Natural Law'.

---

P.S. And, before I call it a night this day; this late entry, to my Congressman (occasioned by an appalling summary of the Illegal Alien issue by Devvy Kidd - down in Texas, and so on the front lines of the war going on,between the Obama administration and the American citizenry - at News With Views):

U.S. Congressman Alan Lowenthal - CA's 47th District

(June 17)

Dear Rep. Lowenthal,

Pres. Obama's ill-chosen announcement that children of illegal aliens will be allowed to stay here has set off a firestorm of both illegal-alien border-flooding response and American citizen outrage at the collapse of our borders.  I join the latter camp.

Vote NO on any plan to fund accommodation for illegal aliens (which if enacted would just further incite them to come here, in further droves);

Vote YES for illegal aliens to be deported - and for that word to be published widely in Mexico and Central America.

Congress did NOT pass the so-called DREAM Act - do your job and rein in this lawless, unilateral Executive.

What a monstrous farce Congress is becoming.  It is easy not to have any faith in or respect for you, the way things are going.  In this area, and others (like the NSA illegal spying on Americans wholesale).

DO YOUR JOB.

Increasingly disrespectfully,

'Stan' Stanfield

--

A shame that we don't have a real two-party system in this country.  The Chamber of Commerce gang and the banksters - who run the food stamp program, and make a bundle on it, and on the more they sign up for it - are happy with the illegal aliens being here; the bottom line is all that matters to them.  So they are a part of the problem, too, besides 'the left'/liberals.

Out with the lot of them.  A clean sweep.  And elect people on their merits.  Not on their party affiliations.  Meaningless, those, almost, anymore.

Totalitarians are in both parties.  Just a slight difference between socialists and fascists.  They are both arrogant people controllers.

And have to go.  For free sovereigns to take back their country, from the vandals, from within and without her gates.