Good question. To begin with, this "lack of standing" grounds for dismissal, is one of - if not THE - most abused procedural grounds that courts at all levels use. It needs to be addressed, not just for this case, but for all cases.
It really became en vogue during the 1960's when there were countless challenges to the constitutionality of the Vietnam war - all but one (I think) was dismissed for "lack of standing".
Standing usually means that a party has material interest in the case and the court can provide some sort of remedy or relief for the party. I know what you're going to say - Don't we all have an interest here, and can't the court provide a relief or remedy just by ordering Obama to show his long form BC? I would think so, but I'm not a federal judge. So, my opinion is just like yours in this matter - worthless.
Thanks.
Good answer.