What Yates and Clinton have done while in the hot seat....

[NCTraveler]

Is something all of us cheer. While we need to keep our eyes on the prize I would like to sidetrack for one moment.

Both Yates and Clinton were two of the most prepared and intelligent people at their respective hearings. They were both in brilliant control of themselves under very difficult circumstances. Women often have to be more in control and more prepared than their male counterparts. Millions of women deal with this aspect constantly and don't get credit for it, or worse. While I'm not usually the smartest person in the room I work hard to be in control and more prepared. I usually am.

I feel in some strange way that I'm being given credit through them. When I see all of you cheer I personally feel it.

[tammywammy]

1. And Cecile Richards!

[shenmue]

2. Yes

[NCTraveler]

5. +1

[still_one]

6. yes tammy, Cecile has been fighting for women for decades

[volstork]

10. She learned well

from her wonderful, firebrand mom!

[Achilleaze]

3. + 1000

[Lotusflower70]

4. I understand that

There is a vicarious feeling to it. But there is also validation and vindication. I have gone through professional reviews with various all male panels and there is that sense of them looking for the gotcha question, like they are trying to teach you a lesson or put you in your place. But I came in twice as prepared and presented my case. I know they wanted to discredit me because I was a threat. It is gratifying to see women kicking ass when there are so many attempts to discredit what they say.

[NCTraveler]

7. I placed my "or worse" comment in the op for just what you describe.

Thank you for sharing and I appreciate how it elaborates on such an important point.

[Lotusflower70]

8. You're welcome

It's downright scary sometimes. They try to intimidate you, make you doubt or second guess yourself. And even though I was made to feel like the outcast or was to blame, I fought to the end for what was right. If I was going down, I was going down swinging. When I see something like that, I can understand and appreciate the power plays and manipulation because I know what it's like. Much respect to all the women that fight back.

[Cha]

9. Well said, NCTraveler!

[R B Garr]

11. Yeah! Wouldn't it be great if they could both have gone off on their own

tangents of unrelated drivel. Instead, they have to listen to it with a straight face and adhere to professional courtesy.

[BigmanPigman]

12. Thank you! Well said and very accurate.

[gratuitous]

13. What you mention is very clear in Sen. Cruz's questioning

He did a cold cite to the U.S. Code, asking Sally Yates if she was familiar with it. Yates did the smart thing and said, no she didn't know specifically what 8 USC Sec. 1182 says (asked cold like that, nobody does). True to his unctuous form, Cruz patiently read off the statute to tell Yates that she was wrong to refuse to defend President Dumbass's executive order. By the time Cruz had read the statute, Yates knew what he was talking about, and more importantly knew what he had left out. Namely, that the statute Cruz read was was superseded by a more specific statute. Also, Yates knew (and Cruz didn't) that neither statute was central to the administration's argument before the court, and there was no way to turn an order that is unconstitutional on its face into something constitutional.

So, not only did Yates know Cruz's argument better than he did, she knew the argument he should have made, and then she told him why neither argument would have prevailed.

[NCTraveler]

14. Thanks for adding this. Nt