To be naturally an American one must be both Jus Soli and Jus Sangiune.
Soil and blood.
McCain was chosen as the Designated Loser for the Kenyanesian Usurper specifically because his case would elicit sympathetic responses.
Everyone knows his father was an Admiral in the US Navy and was then stationed in Panama.
McCain was born in the country of Panama, not the Canal Zone, which at the time was US soil.
He refused to release his birth certificate because that would be revealed.
Children born to US citizens abroad are US citizens, but they are not natural born citizens.
That is made clear by reading the 1790 Naturalization Act where they say children born to citizens parents overseas shall be regarded as natural born citizens, clearly indicating they are not, that act was repealed 5 years later with that language removed when they realized their error.
http://usnaturalborncitizen.com/meaningofnaturalborn.html
Every tab in the sidebar is a separate article.
Thank you for sending that link to me, by the way.
It took me a while to get to it, and I have had to think on it. I made the error (as a sailor and an amateur historian) of looking at cases of aggression and legal action against embassies and military bases in a foreign country, (both of which most lay people regard as US territory, which they apparently aren’t) and making logical conclusions from that.
I am curious-why do you think, in the days of weeks and months to get from point A to point B back in the late 18th century, that they specifically say that only children born to two citizens on American soil are “Natural Born” and thus only eligible for the Presidency. Is it that a child born on foreign soil may be eligible for dual citizenship and thus have a potentially divided allegiance?
Is that the only consideration?