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?!
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:
Just one word on this one folks, woah!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
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?!
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.
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
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
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 the its kind of like the lawsuits against the Supervisor and Comptroller....
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?
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?
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
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...
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)
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?
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)