/johnny
The same can be said of many of those posting from the other side of the argument. It's one of the most contentious topics we've ever seen on this forum, and passions run hot on both sides.
The man now occupying the White House is of questionable eligibility to hold the office, and his defenders and shills have showed up here to argue the anti-birther side since he was first elected.
They argue for the weaker version of presidential eligibility because they truly fear their man really isn't eligible. Some on our side argue for the weaker version because they fear that insisting upon (what I think is) the 18th century understanding of the Constitution will make us look like 'wacko birds'.
My personal conclusion on all of this, is that the Framers intended to restrict the office to those whose loyalty to America could be reasonably trusted. The best way they could think of to accomplish that, was to only allow citizens with ties to the blood and soil of this country to hold the office. It just makes no logical sense to me that they would have purposefully included the NBC requirement in the Constitution for that office (and that office only) for any other reason.
Again - I'm not going to call another Freeper an idiot for thinking otherwise.