Didn't know if you left the thread after the last, but I think part of your misapprehension about my position was that you missed my opening post (#4 in the thread):
If it's a contractual obligation (unlikely) then it's unfortunate; if it's a statement it's foolish and speaks poorly of their maturity as citizens. The Presidency is first and foremost an office. The invitation/recognition is from that office. The insult is to that office and the people it represents, however they mean to aim it and regardless of the office holder and his party affiliation.
I didn't go back and restate that often enough. My argument was contingent on their missing the ceremony absent a contractual obligation/conflict.
:e4e:
If it's a contractual obligation (unlikely) then it's unfortunate; if it's a statement it's foolish and speaks poorly of their maturity as citizens. The Presidency is first and foremost an office. The invitation/recognition is from that office. The insult is to that office and the people it represents, however they mean to aim it and regardless of the office holder and his party affiliation.
I didn't go back and restate that often enough. My argument was contingent on their missing the ceremony absent a contractual obligation/conflict.
:e4e: