http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
Natural born, native born and naturalized are distinct.
Only natural born can be POTUS. Natural born is not a statutory definition but a condition of birth commonly understood by the founders to mean citizenship of both soil and blood without any foreign blood. The 14th did not repeal the natural born provision and Wong only concerned citizenship on US soil, not by blood. Wong was not made a natural born citizen and eligible to be POTUS by the Wong decision.
So the argument is frequently made. If you read Fuller's dissent in Ark, it's clear that he thought that the practical implications of the majority decision would make Wong eligible for the office of President. I personally believe that the original intent of the framers would have excluded Obama, but the 14th and the Ark case go quite some ways in nullifying that intent.
Be that as it may, there's been no adjudication of "natural born", there's been no definition codified in US legislation, nor is there any definition of "natural born" available in the Constitution itself. Even if challenges would have been brought at the state level to Obama's name being placed on state ballots (which would have been the best opportunity to tackle this "standing" dilemma), it's not a forgone conclusion - at all - that SCOTUS would have heard the case based on such an argument. After all, we are over 233 years into this thing, and no court (at any level) and no legislative session has shown any appetite to address this issue, not even in the run-up to, or the aftermath of Chester Arthur's presidency.