Not where eligibility for the presidency within the meaning of the U.S. Constitution is concerned.
From the State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual:
7 FAM 1113 NOT INCLUDED IN THE MEANING OF IN THE UNITED STATESFYI - I am not a birther.c. Birth on U.S. Military Base Outside of the United States or Birth on U.S. Embassy or Consulate Premises Abroad:
(1) Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.
7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency
(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)
a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
d. (snip) In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.
Do you haul garbage for a living? I would be surprised if anyone trusted you with doing anything that actually required knowledge or skills.
Those judges of which you speak, said that black people were property. Were they correct back then, or were they wrong back then?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0060_0393_ZS.html
Were the judges right or wrong? Tell me please! I really want to know if Judges are always right!