No new crevices, but maybe a slight fissure

When I asked Dusty Johnson earlier this week if he was nervous about testifying before a U.S. Senate committee, he admitted to being a bit nervous about going before Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

"There is no shortage of YouTube clips of her ripping witnesses a new crevice," he told me for a story published Tuesday.

Johnson delivered his testimony yesterday, and I watched the Webcast for a report I filed in today’s newspaper. Boxer did indeed go after Johnson and even made him admit that he didn’t know the answer to one of her questions, but all in all I thought he came away looking pretty good.

The real question is whether any of the concerns he expressed about Boxer’s climate-change legislation will be taken seriously, or if yesterday was just a sideshow. Whatever happens, it was pretty cool to see a local guy go up against a national political star and come away relatively unscathed.

If you want to watch a clip of Johnson’s testimony, click play below (fast forward to the end if you want to see his exchange with Boxer).

6 thoughts on “No new crevices, but maybe a slight fissure

  1. If your article is accurate, she comes off as a hard nut to crack. Did not sound as if she gave him a chance to answer completely.
    She may need lessons on manners

  2. does this guy need some facial hair or something? Why is the paper so taken up with this guy? because he’s local- big deal

  3. This is what I get from just reading the newspaper, and not listening to the video before drawing my own conclusion.
    Ms Boxer was not all bad, she just cut Dusty off once, but then did not allow any more dialog by him, but took over the situation. She appeared nice, but was unprepared to be a good listener.

  4. I only watched this small clip but I was very impressed and thought he represented SD extremely well. Dusty – Nice job – I am hard pressed to think of anyone else who would have gotten your points across as well as you did for us…I did find it funny how she refuted GAO estimates about 2012 that you referred to by using estimates about the year 2020 as if those 2 figures should be considered equally – forecasts usually get more inaccurate the further out you try to predict

  5. The boy did alright. Not much of a big deal, though. Just a couple of pols with more in common than apart. Media makes it into a more politically charged than it really is and more a David-Goliath than it really is. Tough times for newspapers. They’re just trying to peddle news and views.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>