Tim Baldermann
Some more info

New Lenox, IL

#121 Feb 1, 2008
Woman too wrote:
<quoted text>
No I wouldn't have voted Madsen in, he lives in my nieghborhood so I do know about him and I didn't vote for him this past election. You sound Bitter refering to a "monkey" running as a GOP and could get elected......Are you still angry because Annette LOST in her bid for Mayor? She was a current board member and still lost. It's just my opinion yet again but I still think the current board is a positive board working together in the best interest of all of us. That was not the case when Mike Smith was in office.
No, I am not bitter, but I don't ignore what has happened in the past either. The actions by some individuals reflect who they really are. Tim went along with a political maneuver to help Mike Smith instead of supporting an election. He thumbed his nose at the option of allowing residents to choose their own representative, and now is asking for their support in an election for himself. He didn't think much of your opinion then, did he?

His actions as a past village board and school board member were weak and politically self-serving.

My opinion. And I stand by the fact that a monkey could run as a Republican in this town and get elected. No one pays attention to the person. They vote party.

My point is that people need to look past the party and look at the person, look at their past actions and not just political spin.

My opinion is that Tim is a self-serving bully and will go to any lengths to win. His past actions as a village board member revealed to me that he has no real sensitivity to people, he gave away millions of our tax dollars as incentives, he sat on the board while our property taxes continued to dramatically increase, he did not support residential diversity, he was not supportive of environmental issues, he was not candid, our schools were disrupted because of political self-serving attitudes, and acted, IMO, in a very vindictive manner toward a board member.
Observation

Crest Hill, IL

#122 Feb 1, 2008
Woman too wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still angry because Annette LOST in her bid for Mayor? She was a current board member and still lost.
If you recall Annette lost by less than 250 votes, and she spend $3000 of her personal finances while Tim COLLECTED almost $50K dollars from local businesses, residents and Chicago politicians to raise his rally. He also used the school district to promote his campaign including the superintendent and his wife. I would say having those odds against her, Annette did quite well on her own. She had the true support of the people, not the dollars.
Great Board Members

Mokena, IL

#123 Feb 1, 2008
(Some more info)"His past actions as a village board member revealed to me that he has no real sensitivity to people, he gave away millions of our tax dollars as incentives, he sat on the board while our property taxes continued to dramatically increase, he did not support residential diversity, he was not supportive of environmental issues, he was not candid, our schools were disrupted because of political self-serving attitudes, and acted, IMO, in a very vindictive manner toward a board member."

If you really took a look at the finances of the school district, especially last year, you would find he did not really support the taxpayers in that position either.
Jen

Washington, DC

#124 Feb 1, 2008
I couldn't agree with you more, Scarecrow. Truth, I feel like your comments were made in a vacuum. I can imagine it "feels good" to make the issues black and white because you can easily claim the moral high ground. On top of it, none of them specifically relate to Tim Baldermann, other than making the presumption that he is a Republican, thus he will act in the way of the GOP talking points, but I'm not going to call you out on that. I just want to address the issues you highlighted and explain why they're not as simple as you suggest.

Most importantly, both Democrats and Republicans agree that we should know who is coming through our borders and absolutely stop any further illegal immigration into this country. I can guarantee you that both parties want to end illegal immigration now. The problem is, and this can be seen in debates in Congress and in the media, how we solve this problem. Do we build a fence, dig a moat, construct an intergalactic shield, start knocking on doors and arrest every person without valid citizenship information, enforce tougher penalties for businesses employing illegal immigrants, or something else? These all can be examples of "voting to secure the border", as they all make a serious priority of curbing illegal entry into this country. We also have to consider some questions: Is it realistic to do this? how will it affect our economy? will it infringe on the rights of withstanding citizens? will we have enough economic capacity to fund a project like this? Only in an imaginary world, Truth, it would be as black and white as you suggested.

In regards to your second point, how do you suggest to pay for "securing our borders", which you never exactly specifically clarified, if you do not do anything in regards to taxes? This country is over 9 trillion dollars in debt; are we going to have a bake sale to raise the money? When you say things because they "feel good", like "secure the border!" and "don't raise taxes!", you have to think if they're feasible together. If they're not, begin to make considerations and move your position slightly so something actually gets done.

Your third topic makes sense.

Your fourth topic was one that really struck me. To you, a good leader would "understand the threat from Muslim terrorists and support the war on terror and our military." I can virtually guarantee you that every single member of Congress, and everyone in local politics in this area understands the threat of terrorism and supports the war on terror with every fiber of their being. The problem is, however, that they disagree how to go about it. Should we spend more resources in Afghanistan seeking out al-Qaeda head bin Laden? Should we put that money towards toppling Saddam Hussein? Isn't it also protecting our troops' lives if we withdraw from Iraq immediately? It's all about how you define things, Truth, and your "feel good" statements are so vague that you know it will garner support to your cause.
Fifth, Tim Baldermann has not publicly issued a release outlining his position on affirmative action. If you are voting for him simply because he is a Republican, that is fine. But you were attempting to explain why Baldermann is the right Republican for the job.

Your second fifth point, about abortion is unclear as well. Does protecting "innocent human life from conception to natural death" include government-sponsored health care for sick children? I would argue it does. It's all in how you define it. This is another "feel good" point that does nothing for your cause because you refuse to be even marginally more specific.

Sixth, Debbie Halvorson has been endorsed by the NRA (specifically the NRA Political Victory Fund, which endorses candidates regardless of party if they adhere to NRA standards and are strongly against gun control). Your point?
Jen

Washington, DC

#125 Feb 1, 2008
Actually, I don't really feel like going further. Further examining your nebulous stances on gay marriage and health care? Whew! That would exhaust me.

And Truth, I actually took great offense to you saying I would like New Lenox to be a liberal/socialist bastion. I love my hometown, I love my former high school, and I love my closest friends and family who still live there. I want the economy to boom in the 11th, and I'm a champion of pro-growth progressivism because I've seen it transform communities. I'm an economic moderate, surely not a socialist, with a soft spot in my heart for civil liberties and generally a more lenient stance on social issues. I have know socialists, my friend, as we all have. I am surely no socialist. I've made a great effort to be clear and cordial through my replies over the last few months, and I do not take cheap shots at anyone like that. Again, it "feels good" to transform the issue into stark black and white, but that is dishonest.
Jen

Washington, DC

#126 Feb 1, 2008
I couldn't agree with you more, Scarecrow. Truth, I feel like your comments were made in a vacuum. I can imagine it "feels good" to make the issues black and white because you can easily claim the moral high ground. On top of it, none of them specifically relate to Tim Baldermann, other than making the presumption that he is a Republican, thus he will act in the way of the GOP talking points, but I'm not going to call you out on that. I just want to address the issues you highlighted and explain why they're not as simple as you suggest.
Most importantly, both Democrats and Republicans agree that we should know who is coming through our borders and absolutely stop any further illegal immigration into this country. I can guarantee you that both parties want to end illegal immigration now. The problem is, and this can be seen in debates in Congress and in the media, how we solve this problem. Do we build a fence, dig a moat, construct an intergalactic shield, start knocking on doors and arrest every person without valid citizenship information, enforce tougher penalties for businesses employing illegal immigrants, or something else? These all can be examples of "voting to secure the border", as they all make a serious priority of curbing illegal entry into this country. We also have to consider some questions: Is it realistic to do this? how will it affect our economy? will it infringe on the rights of withstanding citizens? will we have enough economic capacity to fund a project like this? Only in an imaginary world, Truth, it would be as black and white as you suggested.
In regards to your second point, how do you suggest to pay for "securing our borders", which you never exactly specifically clarified, if you do not do anything in regards to taxes? This country is over 9 trillion dollars in debt; are we going to have a bake sale to raise the money? When you say things because they "feel good", like "secure the border!" and "don't raise taxes!", you have to think if they're feasible together. If they're not, begin to make considerations and move your position slightly so something actually gets done.
Your third topic makes sense.
Your fourth topic was one that really struck me. To you, a good leader would "understand the threat from Muslim terrorists and support the war on terror and our military." I can virtually guarantee you that every single member of Congress, and everyone in local politics in this area understands the threat of terrorism and supports the war on terror with every fiber of their being. The problem is, however, that they disagree how to go about it. Should we spend more resources in Afghanistan seeking out al-Qaeda head bin Laden? Should we put that money towards toppling Saddam Hussein? Isn't it also protecting our troops' lives if we withdraw from Iraq immediately? It's all about how you define things, Truth, and your "feel good" statements are so vague that you know it will garner support to your cause.
Fifth, Tim Baldermann has not publicly issued a release outlining his position on affirmative action. If you are voting for him simply because he is a Republican, that is fine. But you were attempting to explain why Baldermann is the right Republican for the job.
Your second fifth point, about abortion is unclear as well. Does protecting "innocent human life from conception to natural death" include government-sponsored health care for sick children? I would argue it does. It's all in how you define it. This is another "feel good" point that does nothing for your cause because you refuse to be even marginally more specific.
Sixth, Debbie Halvorson has been endorsed by the NRA (specifically the NRA Political Victory Fund, which endorses candidates regardless of party if they adhere to NRA standards and are strongly against gun control). Your point?
Jen

Washington, DC

#127 Feb 1, 2008
I couldn't agree with you more, Scarecrow. Truth, I feel like your comments were made in a vacuum. I can imagine it "feels good" to make the issues black and white because you can easily claim the moral high ground. On top of it, none of them specifically relate to Tim Baldermann, other than making the presumption that he is a Republican, thus he will act in the way of the GOP talking points, but I'm not going to call you out on that. I just want to address the issues you highlighted and explain why they're not as simple as you suggest.

Most importantly, both Democrats and Republicans agree that we should know who is coming through our borders and absolutely stop any further illegal immigration into this country. I can guarantee you that both parties want to end illegal immigration now. The problem is, and this can be seen in debates in Congress and in the media, how we solve this problem. Do we build a fence, dig a moat, construct an intergalactic shield, start knocking on doors and arrest every person without valid citizenship information, enforce tougher penalties for businesses employing illegal immigrants, or something else? These all can be examples of "voting to secure the border", as they all make a serious priority of curbing illegal entry into this country. We also have to consider some questions: Is it realistic to do this? how will it affect our economy? will it infringe on the rights of withstanding citizens? will we have enough economic capacity to fund a project like this? Only in an imaginary world, Truth, it would be as black and white as you suggested.

In regards to your second point, how do you suggest to pay for "securing our borders", which you never exactly specifically clarified, if you do not do anything in regards to taxes? This country is over 9 trillion dollars in debt; are we going to have a bake sale to raise the money? When you say things because they "feel good", like "secure the border!" and "don't raise taxes!", you have to think if they're feasible together. If they're not, begin to make considerations and move your position slightly so something actually gets done.

Your third topic makes sense.

Your fourth topic was one that really struck me. To you, a good leader would "understand the threat from Muslim terrorists and support the war on terror and our military." I can virtually guarantee you that every single member of Congress, and everyone in local politics in this area understands the threat of terrorism and supports the war on terror with every fiber of their being. The problem is, however, that they disagree how to go about it. Should we spend more resources in Afghanistan seeking out al-Qaeda head bin Laden? Should we put that money towards toppling Saddam Hussein? Isn't it also protecting our troops' lives if we withdraw from Iraq immediately? It's all about how you define things, Truth, and your "feel good" statements are so vague that you know it will garner support to your cause.

Fifth, Tim Baldermann has not publicly issued a release outlining his position on affirmative action. If you are voting for him simply because he is a Republican, that is fine. But you were attempting to explain why Baldermann is the right Republican for the job.

Your second fifth point, about abortion is unclear as well. Does protecting "innocent human life from conception to natural death" include government-sponsored health care for sick children? I would argue it does. It's all in how you define it. This is another "feel good" point that does nothing for your cause because you refuse to be even marginally more specific.

Sixth, Debbie Halvorson has been endorsed by the NRA (specifically the NRA Political Victory Fund, which endorses candidates regardless of party if they adhere to NRA standards and are strongly against gun control). Your point?
Jen

Washington, DC

#128 Feb 1, 2008
I'm so sorry. I don't know why that posted so many times.
Scarecrow

AOL

#129 Feb 1, 2008
Jen wrote:
Actually, I don't really feel like going further. Further examining your nebulous stances on gay marriage and health care? Whew! That would exhaust me.
And Truth, I actually took great offense to you saying I would like New Lenox to be a liberal/socialist bastion. I love my hometown, I love my former high school, and I love my closest friends and family who still live there. I want the economy to boom in the 11th, and I'm a champion of pro-growth progressivism because I've seen it transform communities. I'm an economic moderate, surely not a socialist, with a soft spot in my heart for civil liberties and generally a more lenient stance on social issues. I have know socialists, my friend, as we all have. I am surely no socialist. I've made a great effort to be clear and cordial through my replies over the last few months, and I do not take cheap shots at anyone like that. Again, it "feels good" to transform the issue into stark black and white, but that is dishonest.
Your comments are so good and you so clearly point out how political party mantras don't address issues in realistic terms.

Again, thanks :)
Annoyed In Illinois

Streator, IL

#130 Feb 1, 2008
There are numerous reasons I can't vote for Baldermann.

1) His affair that led to the break-up of his first marriage is big.
2) The fact that this will be the third elective office he has quit looms large.
3) Terry Heenean is a much more solid, conservative candidate.

Since: Aug 07

New Lenox, IL

#131 Feb 1, 2008
Jen, it's nice to see someone out here as thoughtful as you. Here's to you, sister.
Jen

Washington, DC

#132 Feb 1, 2008
Cedar Road resident wrote:
Jen, it's nice to see someone out here as thoughtful as you. Here's to you, sister.
Wow, thanks. I'm actually a college student (not a "democratic operative" or "professional staffer" as I've been called in this thread), but I left my heart in New Lenox. I really did. I just hate to see people mess it up, that's all. Maybe we can bring some rationality and respectful debate to our decision-making process in November when we decide on who we vote for in IL-11.
College

New Lenox, IL

#133 Feb 1, 2008
When did you leave NL Jen?
Baldymess

Hinsdale, IL

#134 Feb 1, 2008
Tim Baldermann is a plant. He is the "front runner," but has been dismal in raising money and worse, has really not campaigned. He'll probably get the nomination and just roll over. Tim Baldermann is an opportunist and will carry favor with the Dems to get another job with greater security (better than 2 year terms in Congress). He is in the pocket of the Chicago Democrats and they'll press him to lie still while Debbie does her dance. I can't believe that the Party Leaders came up with this guy, but then again, they are the ones that recruited the likes of Alan Keyes. No wonder why the Republican Party of Illinois has fallen apart.

With Governors like Blago, how can we lose? We just do. Maybe we should focus less on the candidates for Congress and start at the Party level. Get rid of the Party leaders. They can't do anything right.
TheTruth

Hinsdale, IL

#135 Feb 1, 2008
Tim Baldermann has been accused of being deceptive: Times -
'Very deceptive and even more misleading'

What is everyone saying about Republican Tim Baldermann?

A mailer from the Congressional candidate's campaign distributed in La Salle County this week asks that question, though the answer the mailer offers is a little less than clear.

Baldermann, R-New Lenox, is one of three candidates seeking the Republican nomination in Illinois' 11th Congressional District. The mailer, paid for by Baldermann for Congress, uses the banner logos of six newspapers -- including The Times -- and excerpts from five of the papers.

Under the heading "Here is what others are saying about Tim Baldermann," the excerpt attributed to The Times is from a Dec. 11 article, that states, with the first two words underlined for emphasis, "widespread experience in law enforcement, education and municipal government."

The entire paragraph, included in an article written about Baldermann's appearance at the Ottawa Country Kitchen, stated (with nothing underlined), "Republican leaders Monday lauded his widespread experience in law enforcement, education and municipal government."

Times Publisher John Newby said the mailer is misleading. He is concerned citizens will take it to mean the paper endorsed Baldermann.

"After reviewing this political flier put out by the Tim Baldermann campaign, we need to make it absolutely clear The Times was not consulted as to the use of The Times' masthead and content," Newby said. "The Times in no way endorses the candidacy of Tim Baldermann. The tactics used in the political mailing were very deceptive and even more misleading."

In a telephone interview, Baldermann spokseman Andy Sere pointed out the Chicago Tribune and Bloomington Pantagraph mastheads were set apart on the mailer with an "endorsed" logo. He maintained that is a clear enough delineation from the other papers listed -- the Morris Daily Herald, Southtown Star and Joliet Herald News. The Joliet masthead was not linked to any text as were the other papers.

Sere said the mastheads were included to show Baldermann has been getting press throughout the district geographically and were meant to say the quotes printed appeared in those papers.

"As far as the quote itself," Sere said, "someone had said that the article was basically saying that the person who was speaking about Tim said that he had lots of widespread experience.É The phrase was written in such a way as to where it wasn't a direct quote from an endorser. It was the Ottawa Times saying that this guy was endorsing Tim because of this."

The mailer was produced by staff who were "trying to lend credibility, with the newspaper mastheads, to Tim's experience," Sere said, adding that voters should understand the comment attributed to The Times is "just a factual statement in a news article."

He later said it "Appears that the writer was taking as fact that Tim had widespread experience.É It's simply a fact, and that's been reported in many papers."

"Whether this was intentional or not," Newby said, "one would hope that Tim and other candidates would utilize better judgment and control of their people in the future and this isn't a sign of the type of officeholder they might be."
MoreTruth

Hinsdale, IL

#136 Feb 1, 2008
So, we can see that liberal Democrat Cook County Commissioner Beavers is not only Tim Baldermann's biggest donor, but if you look carefully -- you will see that New City Bank has donated to Tim Baldermann.

Who is on the Board of Directors of New City Bank? Why political godfather Beavers.

Could it be possible that Beavers is pulling the strings of Tim Baldermann for a Halverson easy win?
Jen

Washington, DC

#137 Feb 2, 2008
TheTruth: That article is scorching; I didn't know the Times had it in them! He was called out, but I don't expect this to effect him at all. Like someone else pointed out, he's just going to roll over when he gets the nomination. It sounds good in name only, becoming a member of Congress, and Timmy's never one to turn down a good-sounding title! But he lacks the drive to be a successful candidate, even though there are a number of lifelong Republicans in IL-11 who want him to be more active, more of a crusader.

And College: I left New Lenox in 2006. I hate to blow my cover, but I hope people still take me seriously!
Ugh

Hinsdale, IL

#138 Feb 2, 2008
Tim Baldermann is too lazy to knock on doors, yet every paycheck he recieves is paid by the taxpayers of New Lenox and the taxpayers of Chicago Ridge. He has in closed door meetings given his wife one of the largest pay increases in recent history -- at tax payer expenses, of course. Don't you think he would work harder for another taxpayer check while in Congress?

He raised little money and was blown away by Halverson. Here was his quoted response when asked why he performed poorly when raising money.

“I have done very little fundraising,”[GOP candidate Tim Baldermann] said.“It makes me sick to my stomach. My campaign people gave me a list of people who gave money to (Weller). I told them,‘If you think I’m going to call somebody who’s never heard of me and ask for $2,300, that’s insane.’ I fight with them every single day over it.

“They wanted my Christmas card list. I’m not doing that stuff. I refuse to do it. The Republican Party wanted me to run; the Republican Party should help fund my campaign.”

Tim Baldermann sounds less than a hard working conservative Republican and more like a lazy politician looking for a handout and a freebie.
MoreTruth

Hinsdale, IL

#139 Feb 2, 2008
Based on financial disclosures on Tim Baldermann’s D2s, we can see that liberal Democrat Cook County Commissioner Beavers is not only Tim Baldermann's single largest supporter and donor, but if you look carefully -- you will also see that New City Bank is also a supporter of Tim Baldermann.

Who would guide the support of this small bank, New City Bank, and order and approve the donations? Why, look on who is on the board of directors -- why it’s Tim Baldermann’s political godfather Beavers.

For those who don’t know, liberal Chicago Democrat and Cook County Commissioner Beavers has been a true leader of the liberal movement in Illinois. Beavers has been on the front lines fighting for taxpayer funded abortions at Cook County hospital. Beavers believes than no man, woman or law abiding family should have the right to own, purchase or carry a firearm. Beavers is a strong advocate for tax payer funded reparations to African Americans, because of slavery during the colonial days centuries ago. He was recently on the front page of the Chicago Sun Times fighting to raise taxes – to do otherwise, in his words,“would be racism.” Tim Baldermann’s political godfather and biggest supporter in the last decade is nowhere near being a conservative and no where near being a Republican. Would someone like Beavers support a true conservative and true Republican?

This is the leader Tim Baldermann looks to for support, advice and political volunteers – but he doesn’t want the rest of the GOP to know. You cannot hide behind what is disclosed.

Could it be possible that Beavers is pulling the strings of Tim Baldermann for a Halverson easy win? This is a set up right under our Republican noses.
BaldysCloset

Hinsdale, IL

#140 Feb 3, 2008
Has anyone mentioned or discussed the issue of Tim Baldermann’s record as President of the School Board? Intersetingly enough, spending increased — but where did the money go?

Well, if you dig a little, you’ll find that Tim Baldermann has had issues pertaining to having closed door meetings. When, in fact, the meetings have violated the “Open Meetings” Act as required of any elected body, especially when addressing expenditure and budget issues.

During one of the Tim Baldermann secret school board meetings, they increased his wife’s pay with the largest increase of any member of the school system. Yes, his wife works in the same school system that he presided over. Her pay increase was jacked up by over 20%! Someone forgot to address the needs of the student, but then, they don’t have Baldermann as a last name.

Tim Bladermann is unethical leadership to the core.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

New Lenox Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
No Welfare for Immigrants 9 min Appalled 17
The Steele Dossier 11 min Shark News 10
Please Governor. Have Illinois file Bankruptcy... 17 min Appalled 77
Are Scandanavian Countries Successful because t... 1 hr Sharky 4
Hey fellow Trump Supporters, just checking in..... 7 hr Trump Supporter 1
Why America is Fat 9 hr round n round we go 17
2030 The End of Oil 12 hr MyPantiesMatchMyBra 5

New Lenox Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

New Lenox Mortgages