“Because there are no “sources” that will say that a child not born to two citizens is a NBC.”
Not so. SCOTUS opinion in Wong Kim Ark and after make clear that someone born in the US to foreign parents is a natural-born US citizen.
More on the common equivalence between ‘natural-born citizen’ and ‘citizen at time of birth’ in this briefing concerning McCain’s eligibility:
http://leahy.senate.gov/issues/Judiciary/McCainAnalysis.pdf
“If the Panama Canal Zone was sovereign
U.S. territory at the time of Senator McCain’s birth, then that fact alone would make him a
“natural born” citizen under the well-established principle that “natural born” citizenship
includes birth within the territory and allegiance of the United States. See, e.g., Wong Kim Ark,
169 U.S. at 655-66. The Fourteenth Amendment expressly enshrines this connection between
birthplace and citizenship in the text of the Constitution. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1 (”All
persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States .... “) (emphases added). Premising “natural born” citizenship on
the character of the territory in which one is born is rooted in the common-law understanding
that persons born within the British kingdom and under loyalty to the British Crown-including
most of the Framers themselves, who were born in the American colonies-were deemed
“natural born subjects.” See, e.g., 1 William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws a/England
354 (Legal Classics Library 1983) (1765) (”Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the
dominions of the crown of England, that is, within the ligeance, or as it is generally called, the
allegiance of the king .... “).”
The problem with your McCain post, by the way, is that you’re quoting Leaky Leahy, who was lying in this respect: John McCain was born in Colon, the Republic of Panama, not in the Canal Zone.