8 USC 1409 (c) Notwithstanding the provision of subsection (a) of this section, a person born, after December 23, 1952, outside the United States and out of wedlock shall be held to have acquired at birth the nationality status of his mother, if the mother had the nationality of the United States at the time of such persons birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year.
So regardless of where Senator Obama was born, since he's certainly a bastard, he's certainly eligible for the presidency.
That’s very interesting, but in Hawaii a child is legitimate even if the marriage is bigamous.
See http://law.jrank.org/pages/11834/Annulment-Prohibited-Marriage-Prohibited-Marriage.html
Therefore, Obama is not a “bastard”, because he is not illegitimate.
Whether Obama was born “out of wedlock” is yet another question. My bet is that because Obama’s parents were married and divorced and the legality of the marriage has never been challenged in court, that he would not qualify as “born out of wedlock”, but this case could turn on some fine points of Hawaiian and Federal law.
Also to consider here is the origin of the designation “natural-born” which originated in English law and the purpose of which was a test for undivided loyalty “to the King”. Obama, possibly a citizen of Kenya, the USA, and Indonesia may have trouble along these lines, especially because he promoted the election of Rail Odinga in Kenya, and probably traveled to Pakistan on an Indonesian passport at a time Indonesia did not permit dual nationality.