My last commentary, Note to AP: Hank WIlliams Jr., did NOT compare Obama to Hitler, generated a response from someone who never learned the distinction between a "comparison" and an metaphoric "analogy". Evidently, this poor individual suffered from the same poor education as the AP writer who claimed Hank Williams, Jr. "compared" Obama to Hitler.
My last commentary, Note to AP: Hank WIlliams Jr., did NOT compare Obama to Hitler, generated a response from someone calling himself "Eduardo" who asked, "How is an analogy not a comparison?" Eduardo, answering his own question, concluded there was no difference. Evidently Eduardo never learned the distinction between a "comparison" and an metaphoric "analogy". Perhaps Eduardo suffers from the same poor education as the AP writer who claimed Hank Williams, Jr. "compared" Obama to Hitler.
Of course, being the coward that he is, Eduardo did not provide a legitimate email address with his comment. A little online research would have provided Eduardo with everything he needed to avoid his foolish statement claiming there was no difference between an analogy and a comparison.
For "Eduardo's" benefit:
Analogy: "reasoning or explaining from parallel cases". When Williams noted that Boehner playing golf with Obama is as incongruous as Hitler playing golf with Netanyahu, the parallel case of polar opposites being golf companions is the only sense of comparison. There is no comparison being made between any of the participants. None whatsoever! Anyone familiar with metaphoric analogies would understand that.
Comparison: "representing one thing or person as similar to or like another; examining two or more items to establish similarities and dissimilarities"
If one were to state, "Obama is like Hitler", that would be a comparison. It would be comparing Obama with Hitler.
If one were to state, "Boehner playing golf with Obama is like Hitler playing golf with Netanyahu", that would be an analogy. The analogy compares the incongruity of polar opposites Boehner and Obama playing golf as similar to (or like) the incongruity of polar opposites Hitler and Netanyahu playing golf. That is a reasonable analogy to draw.
See, Eduardo? They're different. That's why there are two different words, "analogy" and "comparison" to mean two different things!
I hope this clarifies proper usage of English language for those who, like Eduardo, may not have understood the clear distinction between "analogy" and "comparison".
I have made the assumption that Eduardo may not have been exposed to a decent education and was simply confused by terms he simply didn't understand.
Of course, it is entirely possible that Eduardo was exposed to a good education and he is simply a moron.
Bob Webster, a 12th-generation descendent of both the Darte family (Connecticut, 1630s) and the Webster family (Massachusetts, 1630s) is a descendant of Daniel Webster's father, Revolutionary War patriot Ebenezer Webster, who served with General Washington. Bob has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for all high school students so they can appreciate the cost of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.
A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.