Gay Patriot Header Image

Kolbe Did Not Know Foley’s Chats with Pages were Sexually Explicit

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 5:07 pm - October 10, 2006.
Filed under: 2006 Elections,FoleyGate,National Politics

A reader alerted me to this article from the Arizona Republic on how much Arizona Republican Congressman Jim Kolbe knew about the nature of the communication between his former Florida counterpart, Mark Foley, and male congressional pages.

That good Republican “says he was never shown the exact content of Mark Foley’s e-mails six years ago to a male congressional page he had appointed, and did not realize those messages were sexually explicit.” Moreover, Kolbe said he assumed “e-mail contact ceased since the former page never raised an issue again with my office.”

While some Democrats have criticized Kolbe for “not having done more to alert others of Foley’s e-mail activities six years ago,” it’s clear that he handled the situation appropriately, given what he knew about the content of the correspondence between Foley and the pages. Since he did not know they were sexually explicit, he had no obligation to warn others about Foley.

It’s clear that Jim Kolbe reacted appropriately given the circumstances of the case. The only ones who would take issue with him are those who seek to spin the facts in order to derive partisan advantage from the situation. In short, a good man the right thing, but who did not, as we’ve learned in recent days, have complete knowledge of the exact nature of Foley’s online communications.

Share

12 Comments

  1. It has been pretty entertaining watching the leftoids on this forum twist themselves into knots condemning Foley while rationalizing their support for Democrat sexual predators like Gerry Studds, Mel Reynolds, and Bill Clinton.

    Comment by V the K — October 10, 2006 @ 7:16 pm - October 10, 2006

  2. Well Dan, you didn’t see the actual large font frontpage above-the-fold headline in today’s Arizona Republic print edition: “Kolbe assailed in Foley scandal”. Now, Kolbe’s story has changed from what his office said a couple of days ago. People here think it’s a big deal – one of my straight friends said he was amazed at how people in his fairly conservative office were taking a strong interest in the story even though none apparently are gay.

    Now it turns out that Kolbe was actually a member of the Page Board at the time the page approached him in 2000. Kolbe would certainly know why the page was uncomfortable and I would think he would be especially concerned at the very least that Mark Foley, whom he undoubtedly knew to be gay, might be the target of gossip and innuendo among the pages. Surely, if he thought his friend Foley was innocent wouldn’t he want to make sure that that the rumors were investigated and put to rest? I think he had a responsibility to BOTH Foley and the pages to find out what was going on.

    Now that the story has an Arizona connection, folks here are going to pay even more attention to it especially as Kolbe tries to get his story straight. Bad news for repubs. It could mean an additional House seat pickup for Dems beyond Kolbe’s old seat.

    Comment by Ian — October 10, 2006 @ 10:19 pm - October 10, 2006

  3. Ian, I don’t think this is going to affect other races in Arizona. It may even help Graf, if voters in the district somehow feel they need to vote for a candidate who is more opposed to gay rights.

    One of the headlines on Google News mentions Kolbe going on a camping trip with 2 pages a few years ago. Naturally this will be seen in the worst possible light, because some think gay men are always on the prowl.

    Comment by Carl — October 11, 2006 @ 3:46 am - October 11, 2006

  4. Today, another frontpage above-the-fold headline in the Arizona Republic: “Kolbe defends actions vs. Foley.” The story goes on to quote Hastert as claiming “it was in a sense [Kolbe’s] job to do that” meaning deal with the email complaint from the page. Kolbe’s statements are odd to say the least. Regarding the page program, he claims to “have a special empathy for the program and have always sought to make the experience a meaningful one.’ But when a page comes to him with a complaint that, if true, could have a profoundly damaging effect on the same program, he essentially shrugs it off. Even though he was on the Page Board at the time of the complaint. That doesn’t add up.

    Comment by Ian — October 11, 2006 @ 11:03 am - October 11, 2006

  5. The politics of the Foley thing don’t interest me. It’s pretty much a done deal that the Republicans will lose the House and probably the Senate, not because of the base, but because of emotion-driven, predominantly female voters, who don’t pay much attention to the news, but the ‘Coming up on the five o’clock news…’ spots during Oprah have drilled three themes into their afternoon-tv-addled consciousness: 1.) Iraq is a failure and everybody hates Bush 2.) the economy sucks and everybody hates Bush, and 3) a Republican congressmen was molesting children and everybody hates Bush.

    Politics bores me, and I’m more interested in the morality of the situation. But, of course, neither the Democrats nor their on-line shills want to talk about morality, because it becomes soon all-too-clear that they have none.

    Comment by V the K — October 11, 2006 @ 12:29 pm - October 11, 2006

  6. “because of emotion-driven, predominantly female voters”

    Ah, I love the smell of misogyny in the morning!

    “Them gals is just too emotional during their time of the month to be trusted to vote right!”

    Comment by Anonymous — October 11, 2006 @ 2:52 pm - October 11, 2006

  7. #6: “Ah, I love the smell of misogyny in the morning!”

    Kinda breathtaking isn’t it? Conservatives have a very thin veneer that’s prone to cracking when the going gets tough as this election looks to be for the GOP. That said, I suspect the Repubs will hold onto the Senate by using Cheny to break ties and/or “Honest Joe” Lieberman breaking his promise to caucus with the Dems.

    Comment by Ian — October 11, 2006 @ 3:42 pm - October 11, 2006

  8. Attacked by a ghost and a sock-puppet. Wasn’t that a ‘Muppet Show’ skit?

    Comment by V the K — October 11, 2006 @ 4:29 pm - October 11, 2006

  9. Yup — and considering the fact that it’s Anonymous and IanRaj, both of whom have demonstrated time and again their willingness to namecall women and minorities who don’t vote Democrat, it makes it even funnier than the Muppets. 🙂

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 11, 2006 @ 5:07 pm - October 11, 2006

  10. Ghosts and sockpuppets aside, I stand by my comment that anyone who changes their vote to Democrat on account of the Mark Foley scandal is, based on the Democrats’ history of embracing sexual predators within their membership, dim-witted and uninformed. But then, dimwitted and uninformed voters are the Democrat base, are they not? (Along with illegal aliens, convicted felons, and the dead.)

    Comment by V the K — October 11, 2006 @ 5:27 pm - October 11, 2006

  11. Meanwhile, Harry Reid, Senate leader of the Party of Crooks and Predators Integrity gets a sweet $1.1 Million payout on a shifty real estate deal. I am sure the MSM will cover this story in full… maybe sometime after Thanksgiving.

    Comment by V the K — October 11, 2006 @ 5:42 pm - October 11, 2006

  12. I’m not a big fan of Reid’s, but after the AP hyperventilated over that boxing tickets story (which went nowhere), I have a hard time caring.

    Comment by Carl — October 12, 2006 @ 3:02 am - October 12, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.