The Refresher Course
Feb 25th, 2008 by Dave
Apparently the WGMD audience today weighed in on me calling John Atkins a piece of human garbage in my blog post. This is certainly WGMD’s role as John Atkins’ #1 cheerleading department and soap opera casting service. They feed off of any controversy, and they’ve always been in the bag for John Atkins.
I can remember in the days leading up to the special election, and if you listened to WGMD, Atkins was going to win the election and Hastings was going to come in 3rd. WGMD provides a service to the community, but they don’t affect the outcome of elections. It’s quality entertainment, but it’s just entertainment.
Back to John. Throw aside the fact that he got drunk, drove, pulled out his legislative ID, got off, crossed state lines, drove again knowing he was drunk (and knowingly putting God knows how many people at risk), got home, struck his wife, intimidated his 16-year-old baby sitter, tried to use his influence to get out of being arrested, lied on the radio the next morning, lied under oath, lied to as many people as he could find and resigned while simultaneously trying to secure a spot on the ballot for the special election.
The reason I called him a human piece of garbage is because he has conducted a smear campaign against me ever since, including:
- Telling people I stole money from the County GOP;
- Telling people I got fired from one job and was about to get fired from another;
- Telling people my wife was going to leave me;
- and more.
So I stand by my statement. If I were to change it, it would be HARSHER, not more mild.
And to Sen. George Bunting, who today apparently called on me to apologize to the Atkins family, I say this: not in a million years, sir. Not in a million years.
Here’s the Bunting quote, from the WGMD blog:
“This comment is unacceptable in any forum” , said Bunting while noting that this kind of commentary reflects on Atkins young children. “Dave Burris wasn’t raised to make these kinds of comments; he wasn’t brought up that way”
So me calling him a human piece of garbage on a blog “reflects on Atkins young children,” but being identified in the 200,000-circulation newspaper as going to a nudist resort called Hedonism II, in an article entitled ‘For a Good Time in Dover, call John Atkins’ does not? Who exactly needs to apologize to the Atkins family again? Me? Ron Williams? Or John himself?
What’s going on here is that John Atkins likes to play the victim, so he’s got his buddies at WGMD stoking the fire. Bunting was a happy accident who was on the line for something else, and who certainly wasn’t armed with the entire story. So Senator, keep doing what you do well, which is representing the people of your area and being a model small-business owner. You don’t want to be involved in this.
Dave, Sen. Bunting is one of my heroes. I do not always agree with him, but I admire him. Atkins, well, he is what he is and there is no way to change the facts. He has a lot of baggage that Sen. Bunting should be the first to address.
One more thing: I’m not doing this. I’m not going to be an accomplice in Atkins’ playing-the-victim game. So other than replying to this thread or defending my family against whatever he makes up next, I’m done talking.
At some point, he’s going to start pointing at the Dems WHO REJECTED HIM and playing the victim there, anyway.
What a pity that Williams was wrong but you bought it hook, line and sinker.
What will you say when Williams corrects his statement?
You read that entire post, and that’s all you have? Your personal vendetta against me grows stronger every day, and the amount of people who see you as a crazy old fool grows exponentially with it.
Nice to see you continue to be in league with Atkins, though. At least you’re open about it.
Getting drunk and hitting your wife and lying under oath doesn’t make you a piece of garbage? I think piece of garbage is letting the guy off easy.
Gee, and all this time I thought the phrase was a clever play on Atkins’ garbage-hauling business.
I think piece of garbage is letting the guy off easy.
To put it mildly!!
You are tutoring people about vendettas? You who called me a socialist many times when you knew it was bullshit.
Watch those glass houses.
I’m getting the impression that you would rather fall on your sword than have the integrity to admit you made a terrible mistake, that you are not nearly perfect, that you are human like the rest of us.
“You who called me a socialist many times when you knew it was bullshit.”
That’s not a vendetta. That’s an explanation of your political leanings. I don’t post personal shots about you here. I don’t call you a racist for no reason. I don’t link to your personal information elsewhere on the web.
You are obsessed with taking me down, and I imagine that’s why you and John are talking.
“I’m getting the impression that you would rather fall on your sword than have the integrity to admit you made a terrible mistake”
What mistake?
“That’s an explanation of your political leanings.”
That’s the thing, Dave. That was the lie. Yes, lie.
“I imagine that’s why you and John are talking”
Dave, how much misinformation can you spew? You know that Atkins got in contact w/ me and we started talking because you recommended it to him…you know, before you kicked him to curb.
Do you really think that writing more & more deceptive information is going to help you get out of the pickle you are in now?
Dana — Above, you said that the Hedonism II information was bad, and that Ron Williams would be issuing a correction. Where would you get the information that John wasn’t there? You’re not fooling anyone.
Yes, I put you and John together because he asked me to. Yes, that was before I realized he was lying to me and everyone else. And that was a long time ago.
“Do you really think that writing more & more deceptive information is going to help you get out of the pickle you are in now?”
What pickle am I in? You think I’m in a pickle over this because Dan Gaffney and Atkins’ callers don’t approve? Get over yourself, you phony.
You didn’t answer my question about your insinuation that I made a mistake and you won’t answer what pickle, either. Because both charges are ridiculous.
Dave: “You are obsessed with taking me down, and I imagine that’s why you and John are talking.”
Me: “You know that Atkins got in contact w/ me and we started talking because you recommended it to him…you know, before you kicked him to curb.”
Dave: “Yes, I put you and John together because he asked me to.”
Game, set, match.
And you’re still ignoring the lies and slander that Atkins is spreading around about me. Probably because in this case, you toss your integrity aside because you, too, like to make things up about me and broadcast them to the world.
“Game, set, match.”
In your own mind, man. Only in your pretend world can the fact that I put you and John together over a year ago justify the fact that you and he are in cahoots right now.
And just go ahead and refuse to answer the questions or address all of the facts. All it does is show people what a vapid, vacuous, little man you really are.
Lest any of us forget, Dave, that you must have done something terrible that warranted John’s treatment of you where it caused him to perpetrate lies about you in an attempt to discredit you. I mean, that is what his supporters are to lead me to believe, right? It’s your fault.
On Bunting, I seriously don’t believe he has all the details. He’s not someone to “hate” on you as others are around here.
“And you’re still ignoring the lies and slander that Atkins is spreading around about me.”
Dave, I don’t know anything about them beyond your claims, which have zero credibility w/ me right now.
But if someone can credibly tell me that Atkins has been doing this stuff, I will write about it and condemn him for it.
That’s the difference between you & me, Dave. I’m consistent.
So, have your witnesses proving that Atkins is spreading lies about you contact me. Give them my phone number.
No, Smitty. Bunting was on the spot, and I don’t fault him at all.
Smitty, when are you going to condemn Dave for calling me a socialist when he knew it was a lie?
“That’s the difference between you & me, Dave. I’m consistent.”
You’re only consistent about one thing, Dana. And that is a desire to destroy me in any way possible.
“But if someone can credibly tell me that Atkins has been doing this stuff, I will write about it and condemn him for it.”
That would mean that someone owes you an explanation. No one does. You are no arbiter of fairness. And at this point, I wouldn’t trust you to do the right thing.
What? Your political views are your point of contempt? You called me a GOP shill, which I am hardly one! Should I sue you for that? Get over yourself.
On this deflection of the point you took, I’m still trying to figure out where it’s justified to even think that Dave is racist. Because of what? Because he asked if you are on Bullock’s payroll? I think true libel sits elsewhere than here.
Your obsession of Dave is frightening!
You know the other thing?
Did anyone hear George Bunting disagree with my statement? I know he disagreed with my choice of words, but did he disagree with the premise?
“That would mean that someone owes you an explanation. No one does. ”
LOL. So the witnesses won’t be made available, eh? Ho convenient.
It would be impossible to script a charade more transparent then what’s been going on lately. LOL
I thought Frank Knotts comments today raised some fascinating questions about you today, Dave. Is he also part of the Atkins stooges who plotted to get you?
“So the witnesses won’t be made available, eh?”
I’ll make them freely available to any legitimate, independent outlet.
I’ll be perfectly happy to address Frank’s comments when I hear them.
Dave said:
“Bunting was a happy accident who was on the line for something else, and who certainly wasn’t armed with the entire story. So Senator, keep doing what you do well, which is representing the people of your area and being a model small-business owner. You don’t want to be involved in this.”
Just a small point to correct here; Sen. Bunting was not “on the line for something else” he called the show specifically to talk about the Burris blog item, and to directly show his feelings about the “human garbage” statement. I didn’t drag him into the discussion he came in as a willing participant.
Carry on.
Atkins is a far-conservative-bent politician, I think everyone knows that. Frank Knotts is a loud and proud conservative, we all know that. Conservative supporting conservative. Oooo, shocking.
That’s strictly opinion from my vantage point. I don’t want my picture and name being used as the title of someone else’s blog entry with my words cut off in the middle to suit an argument’s purpose.
I stand corrected.
That being the case, I agree with Jason’s assessment of the situation.
Additionally, it appears Sen Bunting reads this blog, then. Welcome, Senator!
And as far as Bunting’s commenting on how I was raised in his defense of Atkins, I don’t remember him being around when I was being raised.
““Bunting was a happy accident who was on the line for something else, and who certainly wasn’t armed with the entire story. So Senator, keep doing what you do well, which is representing the people of your area and being a model small-business owner. You don’t want to be involved in this.”
Oops, busted! LOL
He’s being corrected now in nearly instantaneous time. The jig is up.
Dana is not a Socialist? What? Did I miss something?
Unlike you Dana, I wasn’t given the heads up by Atkins that this would be discussed today. So I had to go on what I was told. I gave Bunting the benefit of the doubt.
What jig is up? My personal opinion is that John Atkins is a piece of garbage. That hasn’t changed.
The fact that Atkins is spreading malicious rumors about me, a la Dana Garrett, hasn’t changed.
The facts of that night and the lies that followed haven’t changed.
Nothing relevant has changed here.
You can call John and get your next set of talking points now, socialist.
Ahh, all is right with the world again. He IS a Socialist.
Dave,
I was just getting ready to comment on post #28 (above) and it seems a part of it is missing? Did something get edited out…the part about and I paraphrase “bunting should refrain from mentioning my family”, or you might have “to return in kind” or some such thing?
maybe you though better and edited it?
or maybe I’m losing it. (Highly likely)
“The fact that Atkins is spreading malicious rumors about me, a la Dana Garrett, hasn’t changed.”
Dave,
Show me what malicious rumors I have spread about you that were given to me by Atkins. Where are they? Show me where they are posted. Go ahead. I dare you.
I suspect they are as inaccessible as the people you claim exist who have heard the rumors Atkins you claim has spread. I asked to hear from them. But you won’t produce them. I suspect because you can’t.
But show me this rumors I’m spreading about you that I have received from Atkins. Prove this your next false claim.
“maybe you though better and edited it? ”
I thought better and retracted it, because you have enough fun with me on your own without me giving you extra ammunition. And Bunting may have made an uninformed choice this morning, but he doesn’t deserve any negativity from me.
Additionally, your paraphrase was inaccurate and I would ask that you refrain from discussing it further.
“Show me what malicious rumors I have spread about you that were given to me by Atkins. ”
Where did I say he gave you anything? He spreads malicious rumors. You spread malicious rumors. Nobody ever said you’re giving them to each other.
Do you live in the same world as the rest of us, here on Earth? Did your teachers in school teach you to ignore what is actually written on a page and to just make up your own interpretation?
“I asked to hear from them. But you won’t produce them. I suspect because you can’t.”
I most certainly can, but I won’t produce them for a first-class smear artist who will most likely take what they say, edit their comments to suit his needs, and then present them in the worst possible light.
The only person I’ll produce is me. I sat on a bar stool in Middletown and listened on the receiving end as John spewed all of the above into a cell phone of a good friend of mine. So there. I’ve been produced. Deal with it.
No more talking to Dana until he reveals the “rest of the story” he alluded to in the “the disgrace is in” thread.
Hey, Gaffney. Dana Garrett says there’s more to the story. As someone who was as involved as I was in the days and months after the incident, I’m sure you’re interested in finding out “the rest of the story.” You should check it out.
Dave says:
“Additionally, your paraphrase was inaccurate and I would ask that you refrain from discussing it further.”
“Refrain from discussing it further?” What? Gonna call a lawyer if I do?
Are you concerned that bloggers might find out you post then retract comments or something? Is that some kind of blog taboo?
You admit that it was a negative toward Bunting, so why not just set the record straight?
Dave you are trying to argue with a crazy person. It is futile. Dana Garrett is a socialist wacko. It is pretty clear the dude has some obsessive grudge against you. He is nutty as the day is long and will just wear you out with these kooky games of his. Do yourself a favor and ignore him. He won’t go away but like they say at the zoo don’t feed the animals!
Gaffney — You’re a sensationalist. You’re going to do what you want anyway. So go do it.
And Gaffney: Why is my personal opinion of John Atkins news? I hold no office. I have no title. But I’m told you dedicated all sorts of time to it this morning. And I’m sure you’ll do it again tomorrow. Why? What’s the point, other than to help your boy play the victim again?
Who is Dan Gaffney?
Is it slow season for planting minors on party buses?
“I most certainly can, but I won’t produce them for a first-class smear artist who will most likely take what they say, edit their comments to suit his needs, and then present them in the worst possible light.”
I’m willing to an unedited audio interview with them and post it. How’s that. (I can alter the tonal quality of their voice to give them anonymity.)
Or they can record my interview w/ them and see if what I post is accurate. How would that be?
Or better, before I post what they told me, I will give it to them so they can approve it as accurate?
I’m willing to do all that, Dave.
Now will you arrange for me to talk to these people?
Dana — I don’t believe you or trust you, so I’m not going to give you the opportunity.
So there you have it. I gave Dave the opportunity to prove that Atkins had spread untrue rumors about him to others in a way in which there could be no distortion w/o me being caught in the act, and still Dave doesn’t agree to produce the people to prove his allegation.
In my view, this only proves that when you call Dave Burris’ bluff, you discover that all along he’s had no cards to play whatsoever.
checkmate
“checkmate”
Only in your world, Dana. Only in your world.
I’m happy to produce whoever I need to for any impartial person who requests it.
Again, I don’t need to prove to you that Atkins has said these things. I heard it with my own ears, and so have many others. Revealing them to you so you can attack them personally and question their motives and generally drag them through the mud is not something I’m interested in.
Have you asked Atkins? Has he denied it? I don’t imagine he would.
What about you, Dana?
Where’s “the rest of the story” you claim to have? I’m not asking you to bring anyone else into this. You claim to have “the rest of the story.” So where is it?
Sticks and stones may break my bones (And yours too! I got some bad ass muthafucka sticks that will whup your ass!)
But words will never hurt me.
Five years from now when Dave is Gov. he will look back on this and feel some embarrassment. Dana however will just feel like continuing the argument.
[…] on the blogger-wanna-be-governor Burris comment calling former State Rep. John Atkins a “disgraced piece of human garbage“. He seems to be taking the same approach as Sen. George Bunting; the ol’ “we […]
Is someone trying to suggest an improper interpersonal relationship between Mr. Burris and Mr. Hocker?
I get a kick out of Dan Gaffney tut-tutting about “gutter language.” Right, Dan0. Never mind actions, it’s words that matter most.
So Gerald Hocker thinks I should apologize. Well, he fought me tooth and nail in the spring when I called for John’s resignation, too. I didn’t do what he wanted then, and I’m most certainly not now.
And Gerald Hocker wasn’t around when I was growing up, either.
As soon as John apologizes for the smear job he’s committed on me for the last year, I’ll agree to stop sharing my opinion of him.
from comment #3: “What a pity that Williams was wrong but you bought it hook, line and sinker. What will you say when Williams corrects his statement?”
Anybody see a correction in here? Because if it’s in there, I must’ve missed it.
Let the public decide who’s lying or who’s telling the truth.
I like to hear debate between Dan Burris & John Atkins on WGMD radio to settle this. The twist in this - both participants hook-up to lie detectors. This issue needs to be settled soon & possible. I believe this subject becomes smelly & nasty like diapers worn by a baby or adult with no bodily functions. P.S.: I’M A E.O.O. (EQUAL OFFENSIVE OPPURTUNISTS). I don’t apologized for it!!!!
Well let’s see here Roy. There’s the guy who lied on the radio and lied under oath and then there’s Burris. I don’t need a debate to tell you who I believe.
COMMENT DELETED
COMMENT DELETED
That’s enough of that, fellas.