What is left unsaid here is that the Attorney General of of any state has the power to keep Obama the Candidate off that state's ticket on claimed Constitutional grounds.
That would make that Attorney General the DEFENDANT in any action to set aside his ruling. With the candidate as the PLAINTIFF, the issues of standing, and claimed damages would be moot. In other words, that state's Supreme Court would have to hear it, with appeals fast-tracked to the SCOTUS.
Imagine one state's governor or attorney general making this move!
Only somebody who didn’t care if they had the respect or cooperation of anybody in state or federal government would do such a thing. The whole system has shown that it is going to shun anybody who takes this issue seriously - most probably because the whole darn system is guilty as Hell itself on this issue and they know it full well. So they have to pressure everybody within the government-mafia-establishment so they won’t dare rat them out.
This is why I say that we have to change the system so that the people don’t have to depend on the integrity of people who NEED the cooperation of the very people they are supposed to prosecute on our behalf. It’s an incestuous system.
I know Nebraska’s AG Jon Bruning wouldn’t dare to do anything to challenge Obama’s eligibility because he has political aspirations. Even the state legislatures in various states wouldn’t address the issue generically, presumably because federal monies were at stake if they angered the people who control the federal stimulus slush fund. The whole thing is an incestuous racket. Even people who don’t care about Obama’s eligibility should be able to see the danger in this system.