FORWARD!: Four years and two days ago was the happiest political night of our life. We were ensconced in the Barn, which, despite what some people say, isn't a man cave but, rather, more like an exclusive gentlemen's club that is sort of lax in terms of enforcing its charter regarding the admission of women, and we were scared to death, fretting about the so-called Bradley effect and the specter of a victorious President John McCain keeling over while dancing at his inaugural ball and leaving us with his ill-advised vice presidential pick for four years.

We watched with our son Ray and our dog Jimmy as Karl Rove explained on his private network how McCain could still win if he captured Ohio and, at that very moment, the anchor explained that the network was calling Ohio for Barack Obama, and that was it. It was a glorious moment in a triumphant night.

On Tuesday, it was almost exactly the same. Ray was there, while Jimmy, a little worse for wear and tear in the intervening four years, was sprawled on the cement, and Rove was explaining how Romney could win with Ohio, when his network called Ohio, and the election, for Obama.

This time, Rove didn't shuffle off back into the darkness but, rather, tried to make a case that the experts were wrong, dismissing the massive numbers of Democratic votes from our favorite county ever, Cuyahoga County, that were yet to pour in.


Advertisement

So that one guy, who has done more to encourage divisiveness in government, polarization of citizens and foul play in politics than any other person alive or dead in America, held up the moment of Romney's concession and Obama's victory speech by more than 90 minutes before, as every single researcher for every single news outlet already knew and reported, the votes from Ohio banged in the last nails into the coffin of this pretty ugly (love that phrase) campaign.

But are we gloating? Nah. We're not going to dance on anyone's grave. We are heartened, we are happy, and we remain hopeful.

HAIL TO WILSON: Meanwhile, calls and letters continue to come in the wake of our phoney and apparently not ham-handedly sarcastic enough "endorsement" Tuesday of Mitt Romney. One reader, even after we patiently explained the sarcasm, nonetheless asserted that it was a "dangerous" thing to write, with the implication being that our perceived endorsement of Romney could've cost Obama the presidency. If we had that kind of power, we wouldn't fritter it away on the future of the country; we'd use it solely to increase our personal wealth.

We don't expect everyone to read us every day, though that would be a truly worthwhile thing for which readers should aspire. But an anonymous caller was exceedingly peeved at us for a half-dozen things about the article, or maybe as many as 20, though we couldn't tell if he got the sarcasm or not.

"Why did you use `we' in the article? I guess you don't own up to writing it and you're hiding behind it and you gotta say `we.' You gotta take ownership," he said. "And it was a kind of despicable article. I read your article quite frequently and I always thought you were kind of honest, but now today, especially not taking ownership of your article, you really changed my point of view, but then again you did go to Millikan High School, which you always take great pride in, and as we all know they're cheaters. They get caught cheating on tests and doing different things so you're just carrying on the fine tradition of your little high school."

All right. The ownership comes with the name and the handsome photograph that accompany our articles. And we have been "we" since the hot-type days, and I've explained while we're us a half-dozen times already, but that's OK. As for "despicable," we can totally live with that, especially since it's deemed only sort of despicable.

But Millikan? Look, Millikan isn't that bad of a high school, though it could probably benefit with the replacement of one of its principals. Our daughter goes there, so we're not about to come down on it very hard. But neither I nor we have ever taken great pride in attending Millikan, chiefly because we have never attended Millikan, and neither have I.

In our high-school years we lived in a part of town where we could choose between Wilson High School and Millikan. In a way, it was kind of like the Tuesday elections. We had a choice.

With our open-mindedness, which remains to this day a hallmark of our unimpeachable if hazy character, we weighed all the factors. In the end, both in the early 1970s and in 2012, we didn't have much trouble choosing.

We went with Wilson, and we went with Obama.

tgrobaty@yahoo.com, 562-714-2116, twitter.com/grobaty