Except that the McCains were in Panama at the order of the US goverment, and therefore any place they were was under the jurisdiction of the US... Big difference there friend!
The Senate Resolution echoed US case law (see Perkins v Elg USSC) that places more emphasis on parentage, and thereby upbringing in American values only, than mere place of birth in the determination of NBC....
Won’t you agree that a child’s upbringing in American traditions, history, mores, laws, patriotism, etc. by 2 US citizen parents is the most important aspect of the the constitutional requirements for the highest office in the land? Isn’t that concept what the Founders were trying to convey in the Requirements for CIC?
Question ..... if the childern of US Military personal born overseas due to the assignment of their parents by the US Goverment are ineligible to hold the highest office in the land where will we get the personel to man these outposts given that negitive impact on their childrens lives?
Tell me, does John McCain remember his birth in Panama, and does that effect his thinking to that done by the typical Panamanian (Un- US American?) as opposed to thoughts of a typical American born and raised in the US?
Check out http://www.thebirthers.org/misc/logic.htm
It explains NBC very well.
The US had no jurisdiction in Colon Panama By TREATY. Treaties have the force of the constitution.
While a child's upbringing may have been a consideration in writing article II, section 1, clause 5, they had to put it into LAW. The concept of jus soli and jus sanguinis was well known to the founders and they thought that covered it. You have to draw the line somewhere.