<<The transparent double standard you hold over anyone that you don't agree with. Your overt ignoring of them being provided isn't my fault, and trying to tell others that they never were presented, when they can read it for themselves, only serves to undermine your accusations, all the more.>>
My remarks were obviously sarcastic and needed no further exposition. An exposition was provided, not because it was necessary, but to expose your lies that my statement was not intended as sarcasm when it all too obviously was.
McCain's remark was clear on its face and needed no further exposition. McCain proceeded to provide further exposition, not to reinforce the original meaning of his statement, but to give it a totally different meaning. The problem with his further exposition was that it was simply unbelievable.
Your alleged "double standard" consists of taking MY exposition (which was purely gratuitous and given in support of the original meaning which nobody but you pretended not to understand) and then EQUATING it with McCain's exposition, which was patently false on its face, attempting to give a totally new meaning to a sentence with an obviously different meaning.
You claimed a double standard existed since I asked for acceptance of a gratuitous and wholly plausible exposition NOT seeking to change the obvious meaning of my statment, and compared that demand for acceptance with my ridicule of a desperately necessary, non-gratuitous and implausible exposition whose objective was to give a totally new meaning to a clear and intelligible statement having a perfectly clear but very different meaning of its own without need of further exposition.