If you want to look at it from a pure legal perspective, if you sign a citizenship document with a clause suggesting that you intend to remain in Canada; then it is a legally binding contract between you and the government of Canada. However, there are three important points about this.
The clause is very vague, and I think the interpretation provided about it suggests that it is an intention to remain in Canada while the application is processed; i.e. you cannot apply for citizenship and move to live abroad while waiting for your citizenship.
The second point is this clause is supposed to be eliminated by C-6; and if not, another bill or Court ruling will eventually eliminate it eventually since it is unconstitutional (i.e. Mobility Rights state that " Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.").
The third point, if you dig for the purpose of this clause, it is an attempt to prevent another Canadians of convenience problem such as the Canadian-Lebanese scandal, when the government had to fork millions of dollars to fly Canadian Lebanese to Canada during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. What made matters worse, is the fact a big number of those flown to Canada on taxpayers' money moved back to Lebanon after the war. So the intention of Harper was that next time this happens, the government will have this clause to revoke the citizenship of any 'Canadian of convenience'. Is the clause going to solve the problem? Of course not. It is just a weak deterrent for potential Canadians of convenience. The government neither has the capacity nor interest in going around seeking new Canadians that moved to live abroad. However, should those Canadians require Canada’s help and support, then this clause could be triggered.
So in your case, if you will just be working in the states, and staying out of trouble, then this clause will not have any impact on you. This is just my opinion. Just make sure you pay you declare your taxes properly, because Canada and the US share tax details.
