If you do, then you'll be in a position to understand the purpose and intent of the Natural Born citizenship requirement, along with all the various definitions for citizenship and of them all, which one, no matter how the person's citizenship is defined or determined, does everyone agree about that person's citizenship?
That of being born in country to citizens of that country when you're born. No one else or country can claim you and you can't claim any other country or nationality based upon the circumstances of your birth and parentage.
That would be the most pure definition and likely the one the FFs would require for the highest, most powerful single person.
NBC: Born here to citizens from here when the kid is born here. That's a NBC, nothing else.
Obama ain't one of those, that makes him illegal and/or a fraud. You want to go after him? Start with that. It doesn't get much bigger than he isn't even eligible for the job.
As Jeff and Rogers have already detailed in this thread, there is no contextual or case law support for this definition.
No legal scholar supports your position. Don’t you find it strange?