You already admitted that the reason to say anything about citizen parents was to go elsewhere from the Constitution, which means elsewhere from the 14th amendment, AND because it was in YOUR words a "conclusive definition" of natural-born citizen. You don't have 40 or 50 citations that prove me wrong. You don't even have one and you argued against yourself.
Of course I could provide over 50 citations that disprove your misunderstanding but you only deserve a little of my time so here is one:
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), known as Congresss think tank, an official governmental department along with GAO and CBO, had this to say:
In addition to historical and textual analysis, numerous holdings and references in federal (and state) cases for more than a century have clearly indicated that those born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction (i.e., not born to foreign diplomats or occupying military forces), even to alien parents, are citizens at birth or by birth, and are natural born, as opposed to naturalized, U.S. citizens. There is no provision in the Constitution and no controlling American case law to support a contention that the citizenship of ones parents governs the eligibility of a native born U.S. citizen to be President.
So go ahead and continue your little conspiracy theory in the land of wing nuts. Add words to the Constitution that do not belong there at your own peril however because that makes you no different than the liberal wing nuts out there.