+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 67

Thread: Ruth Breidenstein's Penny Save Ad

  1. #1
    Member TheLegendKiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    256

    Ruth Breidenstein's Penny Save Ad

    This past Sunday's edition of the West Seneca Pennysaver included a paid advertisement from former Receiver of Taxes, Ruth Breidenstein.

    The ad reads as follows:

    TO THE VOTERS OF WEST SENECA

    On Sept. 13, you will have the opportunity to vote for your choice of people to represent you in the West Seneca Town Hall. To all my friends, family, relatives and people I have had the pleasure to meet over the last 17 years.

    I ask you to vote for SUPERVISOR WALLACE PIOTROWSKI

    Always an independent leader for our families & senior citizens.

    During my 4 year working relationship, he had never asked for any political favors, such as forgiving someone's TAX PENALTY.... AS COUNCILWOMAN SHEILA MEEGAN REQUESTED OF ME!!!

    Respecfully Yours,

    Ruth E. Breidenstein
    Just one word on this one folks, woah!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    205
    Gee Legend, it looks like no one wants to touch this one with a ten foot pole! Pretty bad when the truth comes out, isn't?!

  3. #3
    Member TheLegendKiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by truth seeker View Post
    Gee Legend, it looks like no one wants to touch this one with a ten foot pole! Pretty bad when the truth comes out, isn't?!
    Doesn't serve their interest to do so Truth. Shows you the kind of people we are dealing with on here.

  4. #4
    moderator dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    3,969
    There is really nothing to say, it is a she said - she said; and Ruth forgot that she only had a 3 year working relationship with Piotrowski. She left office on December 31, 2010 when her position was abolished. Hopefully she did not use that math in accounting for the taxes she received when she was in office.
    The views above are of the poster only.

    "No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor." -- Theodore Roosevelt

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    226
    Sirkin also wrote that Supervisor Wallace Piotrowski's conduct "constitutes a failure by the Supervisor to administer and supervise day to day Town operations and finances

  6. #6
    Member TheLegendKiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    There is really nothing to say, it is a she said - she said; and Ruth forgot that she only had a 3 year working relationship with Piotrowski. She left office on December 31, 2010 when her position was abolished. Hopefully she did not use that math in accounting for the taxes she received when she was in office.
    Are you serious? Ruth, alongside Pat Depasquale, is one of the most honorable and respected public officials we have had in West Seneca in recent memory. To dismiss her claim as she said she said is pretty low. If this was against Wally you all would be jumping all over it. But because it is Queen Meegan, we can just dismiss it. Nice.

  7. #7
    moderator dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    3,969
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLegendKiller View Post
    Are you serious? Ruth, alongside Pat Depasquale, is one of the most honorable and respected public officials we have had in West Seneca in recent memory. To dismiss her claim as she said she said is pretty low. If this was against Wally you all would be jumping all over it. But because it is Queen Meegan, we can just dismiss it. Nice.
    So we should take the one claim as gospel without further proof even though the next line is patently false?
    The views above are of the poster only.

    "No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor." -- Theodore Roosevelt

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    37
    So the its kind of like the lawsuits against the Supervisor and Comptroller....

  9. #9
    Member TheLegendKiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    256
    If it was a department head who had a history of lying I would say no. But with it being Ruth, yes I do believe her. It is a pretty simple claim, either she did it or she didn't. Ruth said she did it, she did it. As far as the 4 year working relationship, whose to say he hasn't called her for advice the last 9 months? More just creating your own arguments to further your own interests. Whatever man.


    How's that ruling coming along?

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    7,374
    You do the crime you should do the time (pay the fine). Although, if she's being truthful I'd like to know the other side of the story (what was the amount of the fine, was there an extenuating circumstance, who was the person in question, etc).

    I do think it could get interesting if WS citizens start buying Pennysaver ads and make claims about whatever they want. For example, somebody could take out an ad claiming that Wally asked them where to get a male midget stripper, or that Clarkie punches blind people, or that Ruth was an adulterer, etc.

    Does the pennysaver proof their ads, and if so, what made them think that ad was a good idea?

  11. #11
    moderator dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    3,969
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLegendKiller View Post
    If it was a department head who had a history of lying I would say no. But with it being Ruth, yes I do believe her. It is a pretty simple claim, either she did it or she didn't. Ruth said she did it, she did it. As far as the 4 year working relationship, whose to say he hasn't called her for advice the last 9 months? More just creating your own arguments to further your own interests. Whatever man.


    How's that ruling coming along?
    Oh, so you reduce the discrepancy from 12 months down three that changes it.

    Are you taking lessons from wnyfuture? You know how it is coming and it is now before a 5 judge panel when they issue their decision I am sure all will know.
    The views above are of the poster only.

    "No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor." -- Theodore Roosevelt

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by FisherRd View Post
    You do the crime you should do the time (pay the fine). Although, if she's being truthful I'd like to know the other side of the story (what was the amount of the fine, was there an extenuating circumstance, who was the person in question, etc).

    I do think it could get interesting if WS citizens start buying Pennysaver ads and make claims about whatever they want. For example, somebody could take out an ad claiming that Wally asked them where to get a male midget stripper, or that Clarkie punches blind people, or that Ruth was an adulterer, etc.

    Does the pennysaver proof their ads, and if so, what made them think that ad was a good idea?
    As a matter of fact, the editor of the Pennysaver has to approve all ads before they appear in the paper. And as far as I know there is still freedom of speech in this country. Your examples of other ads is a little extreme and I am sure they would NOT be approved. But that is your way of side stepping the issue at hand. The issue being that Meegan asked for a favor that should not be been asked. That is side stepping the law.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    7,374
    Quote Originally Posted by truth seeker View Post
    As a matter of fact, the editor of the Pennysaver has to approve all ads before they appear in the paper. And as far as I know there is still freedom of speech in this country. Your examples of other ads is a little extreme and I am sure they would NOT be approved. But that is your way of side stepping the issue at hand. The issue being that Meegan asked for a favor that should not be been asked. That is side stepping the law.

    On one hand, we have Wally on tape admitting he offered Meegan a bribe, and on the other we have a claim from a career politician that another politician asked for a favor...You seem to be fine with one, while pretending the other is side stepping the law. Strange, right?
    What part of "If you do the crime, you do the time" escapes you, Copernicus? If her accusation is true (a big if considering ruth's career was cut short when her job was axed, and that's she a long time politico), then Meegan was wrong.
    Unlike you, I'm capable of thinking for myself.
    Last edited by FisherRd; September 8th, 2011 at 05:30 PM. Reason: probably shouldn't bag on politico's family members...

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    7,374
    Oh, and I'd say printing an ad from a private citizen in the paper accusing somebody of doing something is a little extreme and shows a lack of commonsense from the editor. We'll see how long that policy lasts because it's ripe for abuse (although probably a good revenue generator)

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by FisherRd View Post
    On one hand, we have Wally on tape admitting he offered Meegan a bribe, and on the other we have a claim from a career politician that another politician asked for a favor...You seem to be fine with one, while pretending the other is side stepping the law. Strange, right?
    What part of "If you do the crime, you do the time" escapes you, Copernicus? If her accusation is true (a big if considering ruth's career was cut short when her job was axed, and that's she a long time politico), then Meegan was wrong.
    Unlike you, I'm capable of thinking for myself.
    Do you really want Ruth to tell the whole story? Are you up to having her drag someone's name through the mud and be exposed , so that you will believe her claim? I don't think she should. I know Ruth and she has integrity and is honest. Her job was cut by no fault of hers. Are you blaming her for the consolidation too?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. The House That Ruth Built............
    By winfield31 in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: September 28th, 2008, 11:59 AM
  2. Should Baseball retire Babe Ruth's Number again
    By Riven37 in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: June 25th, 2008, 08:51 AM
  3. Ruth's house Shakes
    By Riven37 in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 23rd, 2005, 01:11 AM
  4. The Penny Protest - or The Buffalo Penny Party
    By captainacronym in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: February 17th, 2005, 08:36 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts