[jeffc]

I would like to request a Freeper attorney to please explain what this "Standing" thing means in the context of the United States being a Democratic Republic wherein those who work in government positions serve the people, who are allowed, as free citizens (and employers!) to supposedly freely petition their government.
If we cannot demand accountability from those we elect, then maybe we should just grab them, and those who protect them, by the arm and take them "to the woodshed", so to speak; impeach, toss them out of office and make sure they cannot ever run for public office ever again!

[Yosemitest]

We might be better off to hire someone to try and steal it.

We the law no longer works to do justice, it's just us. Time for revolution.

[bossmechanic]

If you’ve ever had to deal with the legal system, you would know that they (the legal community) have rules of their own. For example, it’s not important to prosecutors that the plantiff is truthful. And the defense is much more concerned that they maintain ammiable relations with the judge than to forcefully represent their client.
While we would all like to think justice is blind, the fact is that any involved are a$$ kissers to the Nth degree.
At least in the world of engineering, we have rational facts to ground ourselves. In the world of law, there’s no such stable grounding - all so called fact is only human pronouncement hence subject to human failing/misinterpretation.

[sloop]

with reference to the birth certificate question, andrea shea king (of blogtalk radio) had a show monday night about a new approach in a law suit

the show was one hour and free to listen to at:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/stations/HeadingRight/ASKShow

the description provided by andrea is:

a new lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, this one targeting Congress as a defendant for its “failure” to uphold the constitutional demand to make sure Obama qualified before approving the Electoral College vote that actually designated him as the occupant of the Oval Office. a new lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, this one targeting Congress as a defendant for its “failure” to uphold the constitutional demand to make sure Obama qualified before approving the Electoral College vote that actually designated him as the occupant of the Oval Office.

[curiosity]

Did you ever think that the problem is not with the judges, but with the lawsuits?

Ever think that maybe, just maybe, that lawsuits filed by people who think 9-11 was an inside job, or that black helicopters sent by Obama are flying over their houses and men in yellow suits are following them, just might not have any merit?

[Red Steel]

Berg’s case at the 3rd District is moving forward as of 5 days ago:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2179249/posts

[Diogenesis]

"This ex parte meeting with promises exchanged should settle everything.

[real_patriotic_american]

I still believe that we’ll find one Judge!

[neverbluffer]

OK People Some of you dont get it. There are a few and only a few peoplke who have standing?

John McCain and Sarah Palin!!!!! They were directly harmed by the fact that their opponent was not legally eligible and also because of unfair campaign contributions.

Hillary also would have standing. But she couldnt pursue this because she spent her whole career defending minorities and she could not be caught attacking one. She lived by the sword and died by the sword.

McCain-Palin most definitely have standing.