Which is more Orwellian?

Obama's peace prize is more Orwellian.
75% (9 votes)
The pro-Milosevic "anti-war" critics are more Orwellian.
25% (3 votes)
Total votes: 12

now go earn it

I felt that the Obama peace prize was a challenge to Obama to earn it and an obvious slap at the out going administration - George Bush was real easy to hate.

Unfortunately, and predictably, Obama's speech trotted out the Nazis and Al Qaida in the same paragraph, as if Afghanistan 2009 was Sudetenland 1938. One wonders about the laughs that the lightly armed religious psychotics in the Pakistani tribal areas get as yet another American politician compares them to a great evil industrial world power and waves the broken umbrella around in an attempt to triangulate his domestic audience.

I think Obama is actually smarter then that, but that Pakistan told Clinton "you're staying. period" and Obama bowed to (insert Henry Kissinger accent) "regional geopolitical concerns" to assist what he perceives as a weak center in Pakistan's ongoing civil war and slow motion reformation. And Rahm Emmanuel thought it was a good idea to confuse the American right by annoying the American left.

"broken umbrella"?

Huh?

Neville Chamberlain Munich

broken umbrella of appeasement

thompson meets the Pope

thats more orwellian

Somebody...

...seems to have a little obsession.

both easily orwellian

i think they're both easily orwellian, but the fact that the US administration is currently carrying out murderous "war is peace" lunacy policies, and the fact that the "anti-war" cheerleaders are egging on and covering up atrocities, led me to vote for the Obama admin (it doesn't really make them more orwellian i don't think, just more viscerally guilty)