[so_real]

This came from the Library of Congress! It’s absolutely pathetic their standard has been so lowered. No mention that Obama’s mother was not old enough at the time of his birth to bestow citizenship upon him. No mention that Obama admittedly held dual citizenship as a British subject at birth through his father. Tragic.

[riverdawg]

If this represents the “research” coming out of the Library of Congress, then we taxpayers are certainly not getting out money's worth. The statement about dual citizenship, alone, is patently false. While it is true that dual citizenship doesn't have any legal standing in the U.S. (our government doesn't care one way or the other if someone is a dual citizen), it is certainly neither illegal nor is it necessarily disqualifying for the Presidency if, as someone mentioned in an earlier post, the dual citizenship arises from circumstances of birth rather than the naturalization process.

[Mariebl]

No mention that Obama’s mother was not old enough at the time of his birth to bestow citizenship upon him.

I'm very baffled by the idea that so many people here, on a supposedly conservative forum, are convinced that the legislature had the ability to rewrite the Constitution in such a nit-picky way. Pure wishful thinking, it seems to me. Original intent, anyone? Anyone really think that when the Framers of the Constitution wrote 'natural-born', they were thinking that an American-born mother who was 18 could not confer natural-born status on her child, but an American-born mother who was 19, could?