Using sarcasm to illustrate how idiotic some cons are is not trolling
I never said it was not terrorism. It just might be, but I was lampooning the rights accusation that Obama was somehow covering up what happened in Benghazi because he did not specifically call it terrorism the next morning.
They don't even know if there are multiple shooters, why put out incorrect facts?
O.K., so? What kind of response does this statement call for? I have no response to this silliness.
You failed.
Slaughter of innocent people is funny to you?
Newtown and Columbine must have been a barrel of chuckles.
the fucking shooter is dead guys
False Flag. MIC. Illumniati. New World Order
Where did I say it was funny? Pitiful!
Using sarcasm to illustrate how idiotic some cons are is not trolling
Sarcasm?
Using sarcasm to illustrate how idiotic some cons are is not trolling
Using strawman claims to illustrate sarcasm is trolling. Cons don't look half as idiotic as lefttards like you fabricating strawmen to make stupid asshat arguments.
Carry on troll.
Still not funny, in fact its tragic how Cons will jump at any chance to scream scandal.
I disagree, its illustrating how silly old arguments are by using current events. When you take the facts of the allegations and juxtapose them onto a new set of facts it makes the hypocrisy and scandal starved Republicans look even more ridiculous.
I could be wrong.
But THEY DIDN'T......YOU DID
