“Lacked standing”???? WTF does that mean?
It means that the Judge could give a rat's ass about the Constitution of the USA. Obama should either provide a valid birth certificate or step down immediately. This isn't going away.
In this case, it means Berg failed to show how Obama's candidacy hurt him in particular. The fact that it hurts everyone equally means nobody has standing to bring this issue in federal court. The Supreme Court has repeatedly said this rule comes from Article III's reference to "Cases" and "Controversies". This issue has been brought to State courts in Hawaii and Washington (the State, not D.C.).
It means this judge didn’t want to get laughed at or get death threats for the rest of his life.
Only a person who could show significant personal damage has standing. For this case, that would be another presidential candidate. If no other candidate raises the issue they are presumed to waive any objection to possible disqualifying deficiencies.
This line of reasoning is, of course, appalling in a democracy. Basicaly, it says only those contending to be among the governing class have standing. The rest of us are assigned to the status of “commoners” or “peasants.”
With public eduation brainwashingthe vast majority it is only a matter of time before we lose all of our freedoms. We are, indeed, on the road to serfdom.