They were either for it or aqainst it. According to your interpretation they were for it. That is too insane a proposition even for you, so you try to parse your way out of it.
They were obviously against it, for obvious reasons. What Obama has done was entirely foreseeable & predictable. The Framers foresaw it and excluded him from the WH. You misunderstand their intent, and look where it gets you. Trying ILLOGICALLY to argue there is no causal connection between Obama’s foreign allegiances and his purposeful destruction of the country he hates.
Talk about stupid....
So whatever they didn't explicitly forbid, they must have been for? There's nothing in there about having to be "of sound mind," either, so that means they must have been for mentally retarded or crazy presidents, is that it?
Look up "false dichotomy" sometime.