IMHO, the question should be simple: has the U.S. ever recognized a prospective Preisdent as being anything other than a citizen solely of the United States. Rather than focusing on particulars of parentage and birthplace, I think it would be more natural to say that a person is a natural born citizen of the U.S. if and only if the person has been recognized by the U.S. exclusively as a U.S. citizen and has never been recognized by the U.S. as a citizen of any other country. It is vaguely conceivable that Obama would qualify, but there are at least two probable points of disqualification: if he wasn’t born in the U.S., the U.S. would have likely recognized him as a British citizen, and depending upon exactly what happened in Indonesia, he might for a time have been recognized as an Indonesian citizen. Even with regards to the birth certificate, I wouldn’t be surprised if the latter issue is in fact the problem. If Barack was born in Hawaii, but his birth certificate was amended to say he was born in Jakarta, that would likely have been regarded as an acknowledgment of Indonesian citizenship.
The Republican opponent of Woodrow Wilson was found to have been born, like Obama, to have been born of a British parent. He was exposed by Democract Attorney Breckinridge Long, and exposed in the largest legal newspaper in the country. Had Charles Evans Hughes won he would absolutely have been challenged. The Chicago Legal News article was thorough, full of cititations, and explained some of the legal history of natural born citizenship. You can find the article on ScribD by searching for Breckenridge Long or Charles Evans Hughes.
There is no vagueness about the requirement. It has been discusses at least a dozen times in supreme court cases. Evan Charles Evans Hughes, who hoped we would ignore it. was later appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and cited Morrison Waite's Minor v. Happersett decision when explaining that Marie Elg, born to naturalized Swedish Citizens in New York, but brought to Sweden as a child, was declared eligible, after residing for 14 years in the U.S. to run for president. She was a citizen by nature, and that could not be taken away by our State Department. The case from 1939,was Perkins v. Elg.
Barack is not eligible. We can ignore it just as we ignore other provisions of the Constitution, just as Obama ignores the unconstitutionality of his Heallthcare bill, and the provisions of the Constitutions which some of us still like may be negated by the opinions of others. We will have no Constitution. That is the the goal of the far left. If the Constitution has meaning, Obama is not our President. He has come straight at us, challenging us with his having been naturalized. If we have no constitution, whomever is paid the most, or threatened, will pass the laws they tell him/her to pass and freedom will be gone.