I don't think anyone's disputing that.
This is just stupid.
Probably true, but your post continues to argue a point different from what the poster's alleging.
No, they are not. A natural born citizen is one who is a citizen at birth, and where that child is born is immaterial.
It's the citizenship of the parents that makes a child natural born citizen.
Law of Nations [referenced in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 of the US Constitution]
CHAP. XIX.
OF OUR NATIVE COUNTRY, AND SEVERAL THINGS THAT RELATE TO IT.
§ 215. Children of citizens born in a foreign country.
It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed.(59) By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights; the place of birth produces no change in this particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him; I say "of itself," for, civil or political laws may, for particular reasons, ordain otherwise. But I suppose that the father has not entirely quitted his country in order to settle elsewhere. If he has fixed his abode in a foreign country, he is become a member of another society, at least as a perpetual inhabitant; and his children will be members of it also.
----
McCain was not born in a military hospital, he was born outside the Canal Zone in Colon, Panama. Both his parents were US citizens, so he is a natural born citizen.
In April 2008 the US Senate approved a resolution affirming McCain's status.