Great stuff from you too, Sara.
Which brings me to the media. Without getting to close to P&R, every media outlet has a bias and an agenda. They cater their output to the audience that they covet. It's a business. So how much coverage this Danica's history making achievement get outside of ESPN and Speed? Maybe a passing mention. You may or may not like NASCAR but it is not curling, it is arguably the #4 sport in this country by viewers. Did Danica deserve a little more praise for her achievement? I think so. But remember who runs the media. Back to RacerEx's point - men, mostly white men. If the story doesn't fit their agenda, then it blips then gets buried.
Back to USAC. There's no doubt in my mind that USAC could promote grassroots cycling if they wanted to. Instead, they are taking the trickle down approach. Fund and support the top with the hope that popularity will grow at the bottom. It has worked in the past. There was a huge boom in racing in the 7-Eleven and Lemond era. Us guys populate the Masters fields today. Masters (called Veterans back then) fields in the 80's were small, not unlike what the Women's 3/4 fields are like today. So that tactic can work. Is it the best way that I think USAC can spend the money I send them? No way. I would much rather see more targeted programs, even if they targeted the smallest fields first, i.e. Women, and the inequality that ensues.