[unspun]

The point, of course, is this: It is absurd (and in fact dangerous) to think that an American's citizenship - or eligibility to be President - can depend on the operation of foreign law. I do not want any foreign country to have any say, even incidentally, over who can or cannot be my President.

Hardly, when it comes to being born by a father who passes one's citizenship to the child. That competing allegiance is exactly and explicitly what the framers and founders sought to avoid.

You can cite ridiculous examples of someone in the PRC calling Sarah Palin a Citizen of China all night long, but that is hardly the same thing.

[Conscience of a Conservative]

And what about my other point/question - is the child of a non-citizen, born in the U.S., a citizen at all?

[Conscience of a Conservative]

Hardly, when it comes to being born by a father who passes one's citizenship to the child. That competing allegiance is exactly and explicitly what the framers and founders sought to avoid.

Once again: Yes, they sought to avoid competing allegiances, but they did so by ensuring that the President was born a citizen of this country.

You have still yet to cite anything suggesting that there has ever been a third "type" of citizen.