When I first started reading this editorial by Maureen Dowd, I thought it might be a good example of analogy to share with classes when covering the "analogy" portion of a cause-and-effect unit.
As I continued reading, the article got weirder and weirder. I totally don't get the last line.
So, this one might still be worth sharing with a class ... more for the entertainment value, though, than as an example of a good analogy.
Update: Here's a response to Dowd's weird article in which the author, Charlie Cooke, takes issue with her analogies.