[srmanuel]

If you are born here, regardless of where your parents were born you are a natural born citizen of the USA and therefore eligible to be POTUS.

Like I said, earlier, how many of the first few Presidents were not only born here but both their parents were born here. I don’t really know but I doubt very many.

I remember this coming up with John McCain, he wasn’t born in the USA, he was born in Panama, but both his parents were born here, therefore he could be POTUS.

[mmichaels1970]

If you are born here, regardless of where your parents were born you are a natural born citizen of the USA and therefore eligible to be POTUS.

The source article makes a convincing argument against that premise. Consider the following: Two diplomats from Russia are serving in the Russian Embassy in DC. They "bump their Russkie uglies" and nine months later head over to the hospital in DC to give birth to 8lb 2oz baby Boris. Is Boris a natural born citizen and therefore able to run for President when he's 35? Or is he not?

Like I said, earlier, how many of the first few Presidents were not only born here but both their parents were born here. I don’t really know but I doubt very many.

This is a moot point. As the Constitution specifically exempts people who were "citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution" as was explained in the article. Didn't matter where you were born prior to the Constitution. As long as you were a citizen when it was adopted, you were good.

I remember this coming up with John McCain, he wasn’t born in the USA, he was born in Panama, but both his parents were born here, therefore he could be POTUS.

Agreed. And because both of McCain's parents were citizens, McCain would be eligible. This would be the opposite of the Russian theoretical above. Two Americans do the deed in another country, their kid is a citizen even if born in that country.