Being able to say you were invited to the White House whether or not you actually get to see much of anything besides the regular tourist stuff is still nice resume padding.  ;-)

Harvick's and Stewart's comments read squishy to me.  If it's a commitment they have to a sponsor wouldn't a sponsor think it would make their "investment" in the driver worth more if the driver shows up on the front page of sports pages around the country the day after the event pictured with the President (plus other famous, perhaps better known, NASCAR drivers)? 

Maybe I'm too inclined to read into incidents these days signs of contagion into the culture of the disrespect a number of Republicans appear to positively relish conveying towards this President, which to the best of my recollection has not been nearly as characteristic of treatment of other U.S. Presidents in my lifetime.  Verbal abuse towards Presidents citizens don't like is hardly unusual, but I'm referring here to White House invitations, which never seem to have generated this type of story in the past.  Maybe the writer of the story is seeing things that aren't there, or writing for audiences he thinks are doing that figuring he can get buzz that way. 

I feel a bit like a member of a family whose members sometimes say terrible things to one another--and are apoplectic if someone outside the family says the exact same things.  It's one thing if the center-left blogosphere is mean to the President, quite another when others seen as "outside the family", and therefore lacking standing, do likewise.  

I have a hazy recollection of seeing some polling data awhile back suggesting that NASCAR fans (kinda doubt NASCAR drivers have been polled on these matters) aren't nearly as right wing or Republican in their political views as many progressives seem to believe or assume they are.    

So, ok, EZ, not one of my better comments.