So you think a person can be born in any country in the world, to any mother with citizenship, a citizenship they could have obtained a day before the birth, mother dies the next day, foreign father raises an “American” son, comes back to the U.S. under some arbitrary statute deadline... AND IS STILL A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. . ? The Framers think you are a few nibbles short of a mouthful Bunky.
Making up some extreme scenario doesn't help your case. All of these distinctions are arbitrary, including "natural born citizen" itself. Is it any less arbitrary to think that a child born to American parents who just happened to be out of the country at the moment of birth, a child that is born a US citizen and that subsequently spends it's entire life in the US and has no ties to the country its parents were visiting, that that child shouldn't be able to be President? That's completely arbitrary.
"The Framers think you are a few nibbles short of a mouthful Bunky."
You don't speak for the framers. It is far more likely they agreed with me. The "natural born citizen" clause is there to prevent people from immigrating to the US (particularly foreign princes) and becoming President. It is not there to prevent US citizens from birth from serving just because their parents travelled out of the country.