I don't dispute that, but the Naturalization act of 1790 indicates that the founders would accept a man's children as "natural born citizens" if he came to reside in America and become an American citizen. So also, does the Virginia declaration on who shall be deemed a citizen.
Furthermore, I have read the debates on enacting the Naturalization act of 1790, and they indicated the founders were VERY INTERESTED in getting people to come here and become citizens. Senate Debate. House Debate.
Now you may argue that an act of congress cannot redefine the meaning of an Article of Constitutional law, but it can lend insight into how the framers understood what they wrote in the constitution. Judging by their intent to extend "natural born" status to the children of foreign males intent upon becoming Americans, I would not wave it away without some very good supporting evidence that this view is inconsistent with their intent in writing article II.
I am not arguing that this idea is firm in my mind, I am arguing that I can see it as a plausible theory. Obviously those born in the country to American Citizens are the gold standard for the term, but congress seemed to be willing to award a silver medal as well. The fact that this standard still completely excludes Obama, and allows for someone I like, appeals to my partisan nature as well. :)
Denying what it is known to be has become nothing more than a work of self deception.