It looks like the obots are trying to spread misinformation on the meaning of “natural born” again. It’s simple, the parents just have to be born here (native-born), naturalized parents are NOT acceptable. That’s because naturalized parents would have dual-citizenship which every country allows passing on to the child, creating dual allegiances in the presidency.
To summarize:
Natural born = native born parents
Native born = citizen parents
Citizen = born here or naturalized
Watch out for those trying to dilute the Constituion by claiming the parents don’t have to be born here.
While the founders wanted to avoid having a parent with loyalty to another sovereign, when a person naturalizes up until very recently they were required to renounce loyalty to any other sovereign. That other sovereign might attempt to enforce that loyalty after their citizen naturalizes as a US citizen, but the US does not recognize such a claim. The former sovereign can enforce its claim only within its border or with cooperating third countries.
IIRC, the War of 1812 was fought over attempts by the UK to “impress” US sailors into the UK Navy based on claims that they were still subjects despite their status as US citizens under the constitution.
IIRC with the Elg case SCOTUS interpreted born or naturalized citizen parents and birth on US soil as being the definition of natural born citizen and law of the land. Elg had two naturalized parents and was born on US soil and was ruled to be NBC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perkins_v._Elg