Yes, the same John McCain that previously ran for President in 2000. But he wasn't the GOP front-runner then.
And it was raised by the same New York Times that made unfounded allegations of an "inappropriate relationship" between the Senator and a lobbyist.
And the eligibility question despite Congress declaring in 1790 that "The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural-born citizens of the United States."
In case you're not familiar, the United States Constitution sets forth the requirements for President and Vice President. And, yes, they are the same.
Article II, Section 1 says:
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
Okay, that should be easy. "Natural born citizen." And Congress says that includes "children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States."
And that includes John Sidney McCain, III. Son of John Sidney McCain, Jr. and Roberta Wright McCain. John III was born at the Coco Solo Air Base in the Panama Canal Zone. And followed his father and grandfather's footsteps into the United States Navy.
Of course, if the New York Times can get anyone to put effort into defending silly questions about Senator McCain, they get an easier time pushing their liberal candidates and agenda.
Pathetic, isn't it.