Kennedy on Kerry: Not as bad as Pinochet

Setting the bar extremely low, Uncle Ted tells us:

While I suppose in a way it's true that while Pinochet is objectively more evil[1] than Kerry, and therefore should not be denied communion on Quantity of Sin grounds, but seriously, is it the wisest thing to do to draw an explicit comparison between a brutal military dictator and Kerry saying "Kerry's better"? True on a relative sense, but do you want to risk having any sort of casual association between the two stick in the minds of the electorate?

(via Just One Minute)

fn1. Either on ideological terms or against Church dogma, and really any other criteria. Of course, part of the problem is that we're left with the implied question "Well, if Kerry ain't as evil as Pinochet, how evil IS he, then?" which is akin to asking him if he's ever stopped beating his wife. Kerry may be a jackass, but I don't think he really comes close to the 'evil' descriptor, which makes Uncle Ted's unfortunate comparison even more bizarre and embarassing.

Share this

I think the purpose was to

I think the purpose was to discredit the Pope by association with Pinochet, to elevate Kerry above both of them. This works for most atheists, many protestants and Jews, and some Catholics. Just saying Pope and Pinochet in the same sentence is enough for most leftists and journalists. They aren't clear thinkers.

If elected I'm sure that the

If elected I'm sure that the Communist defending Socialist JForbesKerry(D) would live down to Pinochet's authoritarian excess while gleefully defended by the (D)'s

Which is worse, Ted Kennedy

Which is worse, Ted Kennedy asserting that Kerry is not as bad as Pinochet (or the Pope) or Sen. Inhofe asserting that the US is not as bad as Iraq under Hussein?
Some comparisons, regardless of their validity, stain the operands of the comparison almost as badly as they stain the person making the comparison...
Shirley Knott

While you have a good point,

While you have a good point, I have to say that in the Inhofe case, the US was shown to have committed acts in the same category as some of Saddam's torture-men, so to say that the US isn't as bad is objecting on quantitative grounds.

Sen. Kerry has not, to my knowledge, 'disappeared' Republicans in Massachusetts, nor has he ruled as an autocrat, nor has he engaged in a military coup against either the Federal Government or that or Massachusetts. Any brief against Sen. Kerry is not even remotely in the same category as one against Pinochet. Pinochet was a murderer and a dictator, Kerry is just a jackass statist. So there's no earthly reason why Pinochet and Kerry should be mentioned in the same sentence.

Kennedy's statement is so

Kennedy's statement is so ironic, it's almost funny. The Catholic Church gained enormous moral capital in Chile during the Pinochet regime, because they were one of the few institutions secure enough to criticize the regime's excesses. (There was a special organization within the Church devote to it, whose name unfortunately escapes me at the moment.)