A page one story in the News & Observer today features criticism of Gov. Mike Easley’s style.

In reading the piece, I found myself saying, “What’s so bad about that?”

Don’t get me wrong. There are plenty of reasons to criticize our outgoing governor. Click here, here, or here for just a few examples. And Mark Johnson’s article does remind us that a disengaged leader can face major problems if he doesn’t check in occasionally to see how his delegated authority has been handled.

But I don’t get worked up about the character traits that distinguish Easley from the typical politician. His disinterest in a political “legacy”; unwillingness to gladhand legislators and court corporate bigwigs; and general disdain for political theater are all pretty good qualities. Combine them with better oversight and the right ideas about policies and you could end up with a pretty strong record.

It’s refreshing that a governor would just as soon not see himself as some sort of “transformative” figure who needs to leave his name in the history books.

(On a personal note, I always got along well with Easley. This includes several occasions during his days as attorney general when he’d phone in and leave answers to multiple questions on the radio station’s tape recorder while I was busy with a newscast. The conversation occasionally ended this way: “General, tell me what you think about x, y, and z, and then hang up … because I’ll be back in the studio by the time you finish.”)