News-Record.com

Max Borders explains today why Charlotte's new commuter train system is wildly popular among train enthusiasts:

"If you could spread 50 percent of the costs of something big, new and shiny for yourself over millions of other people and get away with it, wouldn't you? It's a phenomenon called 'concentrated benefits and dispersed costs' ..."

The set-up will be similar in the Triangle, where a proposed $2 billion light-rail system will be funded according to this formula: half local money; one-fourth state sources; one-fourth federal sources.

"Bubba" raised the cost-benefit question in relation to the proposed Downtown Greenway at our Your Voice blog the other day.

I answered with doubts about how you put a dollar figure on a greenway's benefits.

Of course, he was getting at a valid point -- the same one Borders raises with much more specificity. However you calculate the benefits, they will be enjoyed by the relative few and paid for by the many.

As an avid jogger, I use and appreciate greenways. I derive substantial benefit but pay very little of the cost. I certainly recognize that the vast majority of taxpayers, who cover most of the costs, don't use greenways and therefore get little if any benefit from them. So, from my perspective, it's a matter of my benefit, your cost. Hey, works for me. And that, of course, illustrates the special interest mentality.

I happen to like light rail, too, and used it daily when I lived in the Washington metro area a long time ago. If there were a line from High Point to Greensboro, I'd definitely be on it today. In reality, that day is a long way off, if it ever comes. So, my mass transit option is limited to the PART buses, which I ride on occasion. Since it only "costs" $2 each way, the cost-benefit ratio is quite favorable. For me. But then again, other people pay the bulk of the costs.

Borders notes that the cost of a commuter rail ride in Charlotte is $2.60, "while an unsubsidized ticket would cost $29.66."

With that kind of difference, someone has to convince the general public that they're reaping some big benefits even if they never use the system themselves. Actually, the public seems pretty well conditioned to believe it from the start. Mass transit reduces pollution and congestion on our highways, which means we won't have to spend so much building more or wider roads and we won't contribute as much to the total destruction of our planet through global warming. So goes the conventional wisdom.

I'll leave discussion of Benefit 2 to another time, but Borders claims Benefit 1 is dubious. He quotes transportation expert David Hartgen as predicting Triangle light rail would reduce auto traffic by only about 1 percent, and population increases would overtake that reduction quickly anyway.

Of course, any little bit helps, but it's important to find the most cost-effective means to solve big problems like traffic congestion.

As for the Downtown Greenway, well, that's not even a project designed to solve a problem. It's purely an amenity. Proponents make a very exciting case for its possibilities, but coming up with a positive cost-benefit analysis might be a tough proposition.

I'm pulling for Hillary tomorrow.

If she wins Texas or Ohio, preferably both, her campaign continues -- likely through the North Carolina primary on May 6.

The Tar Heel State will be a big player in presidential politics for a change.

Can you imagine a Barack Obama rally in Greensboro's Center City Park?

Or a Clinton rally at UNCG?

If the Democratic race is still undecided by then, the candidates will come to Greensboro. You can count on it.

Please, Ohio and Texas voters. Keep Hillary alive ... for North Carolina.

The New York Times gives High Point's Anthony Dean Griffey a rave review for his "breakthrough" performance in the Metropolitan Opera production of "Peter Grimes."

Reviewer Anthony Tommasini calls Griffey "an elegant singer and courageous actor long overdue for a starring role at the Met."

More: "Mr. Griffey, even though his voice has heft and carrying power, is essentially a lyric tenor. And it is disarming to hear the role sung with such vocal grace, even sweetness in places. Every word of his diction is clear. You sense Grimes's dreamy side struggling to emerge. The moments of gentleness, though, make Mr. Griffey's impulsive fits of hostility, his bursts of raw vocal power, seem even more threatening."

Awesome. Congratulations, Tony.

As he promised, Lawrence McSwain called today to let me know why he's decided to retire after 22 years as a Guilford County District Court judge.

In one sad word: Cancer.

Actually, that's an old story. McSwain, 61, was diagnosed with prostate cancer more than 10 years ago. He underwent surgery and treatment and, although he's responded well, the cancer has never been in remission.

McSwain takes a mild cancer suppression medication, which creates few side effects. Recently, however, his doctor has advised him this particular medication may be effective for only another two or three years. Moving to a stronger medication might limit his activities.

McSwain loves to travel and has a strong interest in the Old West. With a desire to do more traveling, he decided, "Now might be the time to do that."

His plans include a visit to Brownsville, Texas, where he wants to research the Brownsville Affair involving Buffalo Soldiers in 1906.

The judge added that he feels well and that he expects his doctors "will keep me going for a long time." His concern is for quality of life.

In that regard, he's making the right decision. McSwain is an outstanding judge who will be sorely missed when he completes his term at the end of the year, but work is never THAT important..

His accomplishments on the bench would take too long to recount here, but the former chief judge recalls a successful push several years ago to reduce the number of old cases by about 10,000. The effort speeded up the work flow in the courthouse. He also acted as an intermediary between the Sheriff's Office and the High Point and Greensboro police departments to start a warrant repository -- a great tool for law enforcement in Guilford County.

He's more than earned the chance to pursue his own interests while he can.

Not that he won't still give to others. Currently, he mentors 10 young men at Western Guilford High School -- all of whom are capable of graduating, he said, but have behavioral issues that could prevent that.

He takes them out to eat or to the movies, or they just "talk about things they need to know to make good, wise decisions."

Talk about learning from an expert.

After he retires, he said, he'd like to work with more young men at more schools. What an impact he'll have.

I wish him many years of good health in retirement.

The alleged destruction of the 1979 mystery files was set in the timeframe of David Wray's tenure as Greensboro police chief. It fits the perception some have developed of Wray as a secretive wrongdoer.

But it seems to me that the state NAACP, in calling for a federal investigation, is strongly attacking current Chief Tim Bellamy and his administration.

"We trust that more professional and objective law enforcement officers will be able to quickly ascertain the truth of the allegations ..." the letter signed by N.C. NAACP President William J. Barber II said.

"The officer who broke the Blue No Snitch Rule ... is in obvious danger," Barber's missive adds. "We therefore are requesting a federal investigation of the Greensboro Police Department with full witness protection services for those honest officers who have and will come forward."

This assumes a lot. It assumes there is "credible evidence" that 50 boxes of files related to the Klan/Nazi/CWP shootout existed and were then discarded. It assumes they were unique files, segregated from others and with no backup files. It assumes that they will reveal "the truth of what happened in Greensboro in November 1979" -- and that this "truth" has yet to be uncovered (so much for the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission).

More pointedly, it assumes that the current leadership of the Greensboro Police Department is continuing the conspiracy to hide this truth. The conspiracy is so determined that the lives of those who dare to crack it will be in such danger that "full witness protection services" will be required to keep them safe.

What a poisoned, paranoid view of the police department and its current leaders.

My column today:

I thought about starting like this: Death Row inmate Gary D. Greene cheated the executioner last week by dying of natural causes.

Garbage. A cliche. Hackneyed. And wrong.

Greene didn't cheat the executioner, who's probably delighted to be relieved of an unpleasant task.

The fact is, Greene cheated me. And you, and all the people of North Carolina.

He cheated the jurors who decided he deserved to die for the murder of his own father. He cheated the judge who pronounced his sentence and ordered his execution.

He cheated our system of law and order.

He cheated truth, justice and the American Way.

Darn it, the state was supposed to take his life. Instead, it let him die in his bed. ...

Congratulations to John McCain for securing the Republican presidential nomination.

It's just a shame this wasn't the outcome eight years ago. I think McCain would have made many better decisions than the current occupant of the White House.

McCain's not an ideal candidate. I have concerns about his age, his temper, his past relations with lobbyists and his positions on some issues.

However, he offers strong character, maturity, experience, courage and forthrightness. When the red phone rings at 3 a.m., he's probably as good a choice as anyone to answer it.

Whether he can win in November is another matter. He supports an unpopular war, and the party in the White House normally doesn't do well during economic downturns. With all the good will George W. Bush has cost Republicans in general, it would be amazing if a Republican succeeded him as president.

But, as it's often been said, never underestimate the Democrats' ability to blow it. Their candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, will continue to battle after Clinton's back-against-the-wall wins in Ohio and Texas yesterday. It doesn't help their party to drag out their nominating process, but now it's a little more likely they could arrive at their convention with the outcome still not settled.

This is good for North Carolina, where Democrats may cast meaningful votes on May 6 after all. I suppose a strong victory by Obama here, which I'd expect, would be very damaging to Clinton. But if she comes here following a win in Pennsylvania April 22, North Carolina probably won't be decisive. We'll see.

Many Republicans are pulling for Clinton, viewing her as an easier opponent for McCain. I think that's true. But in the last week, Clinton has hammered on voters' possible reservations about Obama -- his lack of experience and specific accomplishments. Not that her own credentials are that impressive, other than having been first lady and a senator for seven years.

For someone with little experience, Obama has performed extremely well during the campaign. He keeps his composure and good humor and connects well with people from all backgrounds and in all parts of the country. Like all politicians, he does his share of pandering -- as seen in his anti-NAFTA pronouncements in Ohio when he knows very well NAFTA didn't cause the decline of heavy industry there. But he still comes across as much more honest than Hillary.

I expect Obama eventually will win the nomination and will have a very good chance to beat McCain in November. But it's much too soon to make a more precise prediction. Certainly, when all this started I never would have guessed that the 2008 nominees would be John McCain and Barack Obama.

Back in 2005, I wrote favorably about a state Court of Appeals decision that found a long-distance calling card/lottery gimmick wasn't illegal.

This week, I wrote an editorial offering the opinion that a calling card/video gaming gimmick is illegal.

(Mark reported on this Sunday.)

What's the difference?

A change in state law.

The state is serious about outlawing any and all forms of gambling ... that would compete with its own gambling racket.

Addendum: Please look again at our North Carolina Education Lottery Web page. Is that not a violation of state law that says, "No advertising may have the primary purpose of inducing persons to participate in the Lottery"?

This terrible crime would be shocking almost anywhere. The shooting death of Eve Marie Carson, 22, student body president and Morehead Scholar at Carolina, is just shattering.

But to happen in Chapel Hill, a short distance from campus, is unthinkable.

It doesn't fit the Chapel Hill I remember.

Police believe this was a random crime, The N&O reports. It looks like a carjacking.

Carson reportedly was shot multiple times, including at least once in the head. Good Lord.

What a terrible loss. This talented young woman could look forward to a bright and productive future. She was planning a career in medicine. The university community must be devastated. My condolences to her family and friends.

Here's an early report in her hometown newspaper, the Athens Banner-Herald.

Addendums:

Eve Carson's multimedia presentation capturing her experiences in Ecuador, "The Gifts of Poverty," will give you a better idea of the magnitude of this loss. Go to the Morehead Scholars site here and enter.

Also, The Daily Tar Heel has very good coverage.

Ever gotten into a conversation with someone and realize you're not making sense?

I went there yesterday.

It started with a caller complaining about all the money schools spend. Don't they know there's a recession and everybody's got to cut back?

I don't see them closing schools and laying off teachers, I said.

Look at what's happened to our textile and furniture industries, he said.

Do we want our school system to look like Thomasville?

Thomasville used to make great furniture.

Now they make it in China. Maybe we should outsource our kids to China, send a thousand dollars with each one and let them go to school over there. It would be a lot cheaper.

And they'd do a better job ...

Yep. No sense at all.

I don't know anything about the case of Kevin S. Miller, who resigned as assistant principal at Grimsley High School this week, except what I read in the papers.

But, in addition to Morgan's report today, there's a lot to read.

As easy as it is to find, you really have to wonder how Guilford County Schools missed it.

It's ironic. Just over a year ago, East Hartford school officials admitted they missed warning signs about Miller when they hired him.

"We should be criticized for what happened, because we didn't do the due diligence," school board member Robert J. Damaschi told the Journal Inquirer of North-Central Connecticut.

Miller's case even inspired legislation in Connecticut requiring school systems to review applicants' personnel files.

I don't know whether Miller posed any threat to students here, but GCS certainly should have known the whole story before hiring him.

Homes burned, possibly by a reputed ecoterrorist group ...

The bombing of a military recruiting station in Times Square ...

A writer on the liberal Daily Kos blog expects a " 'Left-Wing Terrorism' Smear Coming."

Like they say, the best defense is a good offense.

Unfortunately, there are dangerous nuts of all political persuasions around. I don't think mainstream liberals and conservatives should be associated with any of them.

I doubt we'll see a surge in domestic terrorism. But then, just one lunatic can cause a tremendous amount of damage.

I hope all terrorists are caught and dealt with as the criminals they are.

Finally, some honesty from the presidential campaigns.

Even if it's unofficial, or unauthorized, I find it reassuring that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton really are tuned in to some realities.

For example, making private assurances to the Canadian government that they won't tear up NAFTA. Maybe the idea of retreating on free trade with Canada appeals to some gullible voters in Ohio, but let's get serious. Canada is our top trading partner -- and it's a fair partnership. Clinton and Obama should recognize the value of that relationship.

Now comes Obama senior foreign policy adviser Samantha Powers (until she called Clinton a monster) letting us know that Obama's pronouncements about Iraq are just campaign rhetoric.

No kidding? He can't "end the war in 2009" or soon thereafter?

Of course not. I suppose he could withdraw all U.S. troops within 16 months as he's pledged, although that would present logistical challenges, but the war would continue. It's just that the U.S. would have admitted defeat and abandoned any chance of leaving a friendly, democratic government behind.

"You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009," Powers told a BBC interviewer. "He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. senator. He will rely upon a plan -- an operational plan -- that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn't have daily access now, as a result of not being the president. So to think -- it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, 'Well, I said it, therefore I'm going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.' "

I hope that's exactly what he will do. It's the responsible approach. As president, he shouldn't make critical decisions based on pronouncements he could sell to voters in the course of a campaign.

Certainly, I'd prefer straight talk from a candidate. But a lot of Democratic voters won't accept straight talk about Iraq, so Obama's playing politics. Look, he's a damn good politician. The best politicians have the ability to convince voters they're somehow above politics.

What's most important, though, is that if Obama is elected -- and he appears to have the best chance among the three contenders -- he will evaluate challenges and make decisions according to the best interests of the country rather than what were the best interests of his political fortunes in 2008.

Can we stop talking about the drought yet?

Meanwhile, the pear trees are about to burst into blossoms. Probably too soon.

On the subject of too soon, shifting to Daylight Savings Time this weekend annoys me. Just when it was beginning to get light as I was finishing my morning runs. And now the little schoolkids will be shivering in the dark at their bus stops again.

I'm far from impartial when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The response to the terrorist murders of eight Jewish seminary students in Jerusalem this week reinforces my view:

"In the streets of Gaza, thousands of Palestinians celebrated, with people firing into the air and sounding their horns," Al Jazeera reported.

"It is clear that those people celebrating this bloodshed have shown themselves to be not only the enemies of Israel but of all of humanity," Israel government spokesman Mark Regev said.

Yet, as Al Jazeera further reported, that wasn't the only reaction:

"After the shooting, hundreds of seminary students demonstrated outside the building, screaming for revenge and chanting against Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, as well as 'Death to Arabs'.

"The angry crowd turned on Al Jazeera's crew and the team had to leave under escort by Israeli police."

"This heroic attack in Jerusalem is a normal response to the crimes of the occupier and its murder of civilians," a spokesman for Hamas said.

"An Israeli military onslaught in Gaza killed more than 120 Palestinians in the past week," Al Jazeera noted.

It did not add that the "Israeli military onslaught" took place in response to Palestinian rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel.

On and on it goes.

I draw a moral distinction between Israel and Hamas on the basis of the Hamas aim to wipe out Israel and kill every Jew ... and if that happened, its followers would celebrate in the streets. Israel is defending its existence.

Yet, I despair of its ability to prevail through retaliation. When will they find a better way?

Gov. Mike Easley is one of North Carolina's Democratic superdelegates, and he doesn't feel bound to follow the state's popular vote when deciding between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Easley hasn't yet made up his mind between them, he said in an informal conversation in Chapel Hill yesterday before he addressed a gathering of North Carolina editorial writers.

I think superdelegates were meant to be free agents, but some people might be troubled by the idea that a few individuals in effect could negate the will of the majority as expressed in a primary. That's a distinct possibility. In fact, superdelegates likely will determine the nomination, and the outcome might not fall in line with the wishes of most rank-and-file Democrats.

Imagine if, for the general election, some Electoral College electors could cast their ballots however they wanted. That's the power superdelegates have in the nominating process.

Easley and other superdelegates won't be abusing their power if they contradict the vote of the people of their state because they have the power to do as they like -- whether anyone else likes it or not.

North Carolina editorial writers heard from six gubernatorial candidates today, in this order:

Fred Smith, R
Beverly Perdue, D
Bill Graham, R
Bob Orr, R
Richard Moore, D
Pat McCrory, R

Five out of six think the state's been suffering from pretty poor leadership the last few years.

Perdue, the lieutenant governor since 2001, thinks things are just fine. That's really simplified, but I think a fair impression. I was really disappointed in her response to my question about cleaning up corruption in Raleigh -- public campaign financing. I was looking for something like a vow to root out the crooks, not let them run for office on the taxpayers' dime.

I thought McCrory made a very strong showing today, followed closely by Moore, Orr and Smith.

Graham's credentials are light, and Perdue seems likely to give us a continuation of the Easley administration. Interestingly, she appears very confident that she will be the next governor. We'll see.

Moore, the state treasurer, trails her in the polls but is running very vigorously. He's getting around to a lot of newspapers, a big point in his favor. He's a strong proponent of accountability, which he says is a rare commodity in Raleigh (outside his own office, of course). "I'm going to be the most open and accessible governor in modern times," he promised.

McCrory, the seven-term mayor of Charlotte, made a similar pledge. He really hammered Mike Easley for refusing to meet with a delegation of big-city mayors, DA's and police chiefs that sought an audience last year to talk about crime problems. "We couldn't get in his office," McCrory said. "Incredible. A mayor can't get away with that and neither should a governor." McCrory's running on a platform of having gotten things done in the state's major metro, and "stepping on the toes of the left and the right" to clear the way for progress.

Orr, a former state Supreme Court justice, is thoughtful and congenial. Unlike many politicians, he acknowledges complexities and subtleties in public policy issues, taking a logical, intellectual approach to problem-solving. No wonder he's dragging in the polls.

Smith is a state senator and businessman from Johnston County. He may be the most conservative candidate, with predictable positions on many social issues, but he's also a student of leadership and pronounces himself a gradualist, believing if you keep doing little things right over a long period of time you'll reach positive outcomes. He's good at outlining step-by-step solutions to pressing problems.

I agree with five of the candidates that better, more accountable leadership is needed in Raleigh. In the months ahead, voters should look carefully to determine which one makes the best case for himself.

Gov. Mike Easley says he'll ask the legislature for more power over water policy.

His goal is to "make our state drought proof."

The legislature? He's aiming far too low. For drought-proofing, he'll need divine authority.

Seriously, the governor has some good proposals (which we'll address editorially later in the week). But some will be controversial.

His initiatives represent a major power shift from local governments to the state.

Just imagine the reaction in Greensboro if, after Randleman Lake water finally comes on line, a future governor orders half of it piped to Raleigh.

This is diving into the deep end of state and local politics.

There's a footnote to my brief visit to Belize last month:

The Red Cross won't take my blood.

I was rejected this evening because the CDC lists Belize as a malaria risk area.

I had no idea. But then, I didn't check. Should have. Still would have gone, but I might have put on some insect repellant. Margaret did.

Fortunately, the mosquitoes weren't out when we motored up the New River or hiked through the forests at Lamanai. Maybe they would have swarmed at dusk.

Now I'm deferred from donating for a year ... again. I knew that would be the case after Kenny and I went to Tanzania two years ago. We took an antimalarial medication, mefloquine, but luckily weren't bothered by skeeters there, either.

Mefloquine can have some funky side effects, which Andrew experienced in 2+ years on the stuff. Kenny and I were fine.

CDC recommends chloroquine for travel to Belize, but I wouldn't mess with it for just a brief stay. You probably can get in and out of the country before the mosquitoes know you're there.

My column today:

CHAPEL HILL -- Flowers mark the place where Eve Carson's body was found a week ago.

Hillcrest Road winds through a quiet, peaceful, hilly neighborhood not far off East Franklin Street. Attractive homes are sited on large, wooded lots.

Residents often left their doors unlocked -- until recently, a man who lives nearby says. Lately, there have been some break-ins. And now this, a horror beyond imagination. ...

State Rep. John Blust points out that he voted against the botched Mental Health System Reform Act in 2001 -- one of only a dozen House members to oppose it.

This is the legislation that Gov. Mike Easley now says he was against from the beginning -- although his Health and Human Services secretary acclaimed it and he signed the bill without complaint.

Guilford County's other representatives voted for it: Alma Adams, Joanne Bowie, Flossie Boyd-McIntyre, Mary Jarrell and Maggie Jeffus.

The News & Observer of Raleigh recently produced a series of articles reporting that the misbegotten mental-health reform effort has wasted hundreds of millions of dollars and failed to provide needed services.

Demario James Atwater makes a powerful argument against alternatives to incarceration.

He should have been locked up last year. Instead, he was given a suspended sentence and put on 24 months probation for illegal possession of a firearm by a felon.

He was previously on probation for a breaking-and-entering conviction.

Here's his Department of Correction file.

Atwater was arrested today in Durham and charged with the murder of Eve Carson in Chapel Hill a week ago.

If he'd been given an active sentence and put behind bars for the firearm charge ... well, you can figure out how things would be different.

And I'll observe the legal niceties here by pointing out that young Mr. Atwater is only a suspect, not proven guilty.

His alleged partner, Lawrence Alvin Lovette, only 17, has been in less serious trouble. At this hour, he apparently has not been apprehended. I guess it's just a matter of time. Update, Thursday morning: They got him. More good police work.

Compliments go to Chapel Hill police, Durham police, the SBI and many other agencies that helped in this investigation. Also critical, authorities say, were the many tips that came in to Crimestoppers lines.

Yes, it appears Atwater and Lovette were snitched out -- probably by neighbors, acquaintances, maybe even friends and family. What decent person wouldn't?

It looks like justice will be done in this sad case, at least in a legal sense. If Atwater and Lovette are convicted, they'll be put away for the rest of their lives.

If only Atwood had been given a couple of years of hard time sooner.

It might not have rehabilitated him, but he wouldn't have been loose last week.

The point of putting people in prison is public safety. It seems there was a terrible failure in this case.

Addendum, March 14: Today's story confirms the point I made in this post.

"We have not done quality supervision of Mr. Atwater," says the director of the state's Division of Community Corrections.

No kidding. Lack of "quality supervision" has carried some tragic consequences.

This looks like another part of state government that isn't working very well.

It's too soon to declare 2008's Hypocrite of the Year, but Eliot Spitzer will be hard to catch.

"Over the course of my public life, I have insisted -- I believe correctly -- that people regardless of their position or power take responsibility for their conduct," Spitzer said yesterday. "I can and will ask no less of myself. For this reason, I am resigning from the office of governor."

Yeah, he's taking responsibility for his conduct ... because he was CAUGHT after years of dallying with high-priced prostitutes.

While he was attorney general of New York, the state's top law-enforcement officer, and then as governor.

As attorney general, the New York Post reports, Spitzer "led investigations into prostitution -- and backed legislation targeting the sex trade, including a provision aimed at men who frequent prostitutes."

And he reportedly was a big proponent of condom use ... for other guys.

It only gets worse when he talks about how much he cares about his wife and kids.

Spitzer strikes me as a rich and powerful man who thought he could get away with anything.

How Barack Obama can kick it away:

During the Pledge of Allegiance, he holds his hand over his heart with his fingers crossed.

He says, "Yes, I'd be honored to be Hillary's running mate if she wins the nomination."

He goes on a pilgrimage to Mecca.

He's Client No. 10

He hires Jesse Jackson to help him shore up the black vote.

He vows to quit his campaign if the Cubs don't win the Series.

He agrees Florida and Michigan should count.

He invites Rev. Jeremiah Wright to speak at the convention.

Campaigning in North Carolina, he refuses to eat barbecue.

He says, "Nobody would vote for Hillary if she were a man ... or is she?"

The other day I asked sports editor Joe Sirera if he needed any help from the editorial department covering the ACC tournament. He seemed interested ...

... until I mentioned that, of course, our editorial board would have to confer after each game to determine what it really meant and whether the outcome met with our approval, and it would probably take us three to four days to produce a story.

Joe declined the offer. Seems they're always in a big hurry over in sports.

OK, I've still got the blog. After discussions with my colleagues, I'll let you know next week what I thought of yesterday's action.

The debate a few years ago about surveillance cameras vs. privacy I think is pretty much over.

Surveillance cameras won.

That's a good thing, and the Eve Carson case is one reason why. The pictures of her suspected killers, widely distributed through the media, led to their arrests. They'll also help police put together a time line of events.

Private businesses have been using cameras effectively for decades. Many cities put cameras up in public places to deter or detect crime, but there's been resistance to this.

That's odd. If police are only too happy to have access to images captured by private surveillance systems, they should deploy their own where needed.

I'm not insensitive to the concern that cameras might provide a view into someone's home, a clear (or maybe blurry, depending on quality) invasion of privacy. But the benefits seem overwhelming. After all, not every murderer is stupid enough to stick his face in front of an ATM camera, but even clever ones risk being seen by street surveillance systems.

If surveillance cameras can keep streets, parks, greenways, parking decks and other public places safer, or help police catch criminals, I'm in favor. Is there any question anymore?

Judge Joe Craig has opened a door for High Point's furniture market.

Craig, resident Superior Court judge in High Point, granted an injunction to stop state ALE agents from busting video slot machines, which are simply electronic gambling devices by a different name and in slightly different form.

Craig apparently bought the argument advanced by an attorney for machine operators that "this is not a game of chance. This is a way to simulate a game of chance ..." as quoted in Jen's article Saturday.

The judge allowed that this awfully confusing issue maybe ought to be decided by the legislature rather than the courts. Normally, that's a welcome sentiment coming from the bench, but in this case -- as I've written before -- the legislature already has acted. What's needed is for a judge to enforce the common-sense meaning of the law. Legislative intent is as plain as day.

Nevertheless, now that Craig has weighed in to the benefit of the gaming industry, there may be an opportunity here for the High Point Market.

Remember, the local furniture show is competing tooth and nail against its rival in glitzy Las Vegas, where people entertain themselves by losing huge amounts of money in all kinds of gambling outlets.

This may be a chance for High Point to get in the game.

Of course, the market will have to dodge around state law by coming up with rackets that "simulate" games of chance, but it apparently doesn't require a lot of camouflage to fool a judge. They could probably run blackjack games and call them Go Fish, for example. It should be easy to work out the details.

What's important is the judicial OK. After all, if the state meant to ban gambling, it wouldn't have left all those little tiny loopholes in the law. Surely one must be big enough to squeeze a furniture market through.

The Secret Service says today there was "no security concern whatsoever" preventing Barack Obama from holding a campaign event in Greensboro Wednesday.

That's the word from spokesman Eric Zahren.

Our story cites Mayor Yvonne Johnson as the source for the information about security concerns.

Something apparently was misconstrued, Zahren added.

That seems to leave scheduling issues or inability to find a suitable venue. I'm seeking more information.

Obama is visiting Charlotte and Fayetteville Wednesday.

I'd say chances are good he'll get to Greensboro before May 6 -- especially since there aren't any security problems here.

P.S. Zahren was quoted in the New York Times last May when the Secret Service began providing protection for Obama.

Update, 1:20 p.m.: I've talked to a couple of media folks with the Obama campaign, Dan Leistikow and Amy Brundage, who dismiss the security issue. They both say Obama will visit the Greensboro area in the coming weeks. Leistikow particularly stressed that Obama believes North Carolina will be a battleground state and intends to compete vigorously during the primary and general election campaigns.

Update, 2:20: Mayor Johnson tells me "there was a security concern issue ... just in the sense that there's always a security concern."

Aha. The Secret Service is involved in both the Obama and Clinton campaigns. As a matter of routine, security issues have to be taken into consideration for any event involving one of the candidates.

But there was no specific security concern associated with Greensboro, the mayor said, and security had nothing to do with why Obama wasn't able to schedule an appearance here this time.

Something might have gotten lost in translation.

It shouldn't be all that hard for the Supreme Court to conclude that the right to keep and bear arms confers the right to keep and bear arms.

Talented J.J. Hickson ought to get away from the Wolfpack before he catches the mysterious malady of mediocrity that infected his teammates this season.

Barack Obama will try to further separate himself from controversial preacher Jeremiah Wright today, but it's harder to explain his 20-year association with a congregation that must approve of Wright's messages.

Does the NCAA care about attendance at its women's basketball tournament? Holding a regional in Greensboro and NOT letting the No. 1-seeded Carolina team play here is insane. Face it, the women's game just isn't popular enough to draw crowds without a strong local team. I attended a game last year between Rutgers and Arizona State, purchasing a ticket outside from a woman who was desperately trying to unload a handful after Duke had been eliminated. I gave her $5, basically because I felt sorry for her.

I had a hunch about the lottery case when I found out which judges made up the panel hearing it last May: two Democrats and a Republican.

Sure enough, today they produced a 2-1 decision in favor of the lottery.

OK, the judiciary is nominally nonpartisan. I support that. But everyone knows who's a D, who's an R. Although plenty of Democrats strenuously oppose the lottery, this baby belongs squarely to Democratic Gov. Mike Easley, Lt. Gov. (and Democratic gubernatorial candidate) Beverly Perdue and Democratic legislative leaders. It would have been a huge embarrassment for them if the court nailed them for a procedural violation.

That was the substance of this case, by the way -- whether the legislature violated a constitutional requirement in how it passed the lottery act in 2005.

There's no question it violated the rules of fair play. Legislative leaders, pushed by the governor, wanted to pass a lottery in the worst way -- and they did. It took a hurry-up vote in the Senate with a couple of opponents absent to gain a tie, which Perdue then broke in favor of the lottery.

Foes cried foul. The lottery was a revenue bill -- that was its stated purpose -- and revenue bills are supposed to be voted on three times on three separate days.

The reason is to protect taxpayers from don't-blink-or-you'll-miss-it legislative fast-track shaft jobs. Well, this time somebody blinked.

No one pretends what happened was ethical. This was 2005, the bad old days before legislative leaders cared about ethics (in other words, before they started getting caught and sent to prison). But was it unconstitutional?

Wake County Superior Court Judge Henry Hight said no in March 2006. The case bounced up to the Court of Appeals, which heard it last May and took an unusually long time to issue its decision.

In fairness, I will state unequivocally my belief that Judge James Wynn, who wrote this opinion, and Judge Bob Hunter, who joined him -- both Democrats -- are fair and honorable.

Same for Judge Ann Marie Calabria, the Republican who wrote the dissenting opinion.

I just think, for whatever reason, in some cases judges bend to a gravitational pull toward the prevailing position of their political party. Not in many cases, but in a few where clear partisan territory has been staked out. This looks like one of those cases.

That makes it easier for Wynn and Hunter to see lottery revenue as something other than a tax and for Calabria to seize the opposing view.

I side with Calabria, but I'm far from unbiased. I abhor the lottery and hope to see it wiped off the map of North Carolina for the cultural rot it represents.

It's notable on that point that, even if her judicial conclusion prevailed, Calabria would not order the lottery out of existence. Instead, she'd give the legislature 20 days to save it by reconvening and voting on a lottery bill the right way.

Of course, given that it couldn't pass the right way the first time, and the fact that its performance has fallen short of the lofty predictions of Gov. Easley and other boosters, it might not be revived. But that's strictly an academic argument ... for now.

In his majority opinion, Wynn determined that a lottery isn't a tax because it isn't imposed on anyone and that a player who chooses to purchase a ticket "receives the exclusive benefit of the right to a chance of winning the lottery prizes, a benefit that is not conferred upon the general population of the State through the disbursement of state funds."

In polite judicial language, Calabria ridiculed that notion: "Virtually every purchase is voluntary and the majority's analysis would convert nearly every assessment, including a general sales tax, into a 'fee,' " she wrote.

I agree. One could as easily argue that, if you purchase a car, you receive the "exclusive benefit" of the right to drive that car. You also have to pay a lot of taxes on it, and those taxes confer a benefit on the people of the state.

The lottery "tax" isn't piddling. If a little more than 50 cents on every dollar is returned to the public in prizes, the rest amounts to the effective tax.

Procedurally, the significance of today's split decision is that it gives plaintiffs an automatic right of appeal to the N.C. Supreme Court ... where the (unofficial) partisan math is reversed. Four justices are Republicans and three are Democrats. At least at present. One seat is at stake in this year's election, that of Bob Edmunds from Greensboro. He's a Republican, although one who enjoys bipartisan support. I don't know when an appeal would be heard or decided. But lottery proponents should not be too confident that today's ruling will stand.

Addendum: Chris Fitzsimon of NC Policy Watch slams the lottery from the progressive perspective.

My column today:

Many voters want a federal government that works better and think it's time for a change in Washington.

That's a big reason for Barack Obama's success in the Democratic presidential primaries so far.

At the same time, North Carolina voters should cast wary eyes toward Raleigh. It's becoming more apparent that state government isn't performing well, either. ...

New York's new governor: I don't pay for extramarital sex.

Quite an improvement from his predecessor.

I've been knocking on North Carolina politicians lately (see below), but I wouldn't trade ours for the bunch in New York.

Our editorial today, "Higher standards in Raleigh require legislator's expulsion," referred to "Black & Decker scandals."

The reference, of course, is to Jim Black and Michael Decker, the former legislators who paired up on a bribery scheme and now live in federal prison.

It drew this email response:

"I am Vice President of Investor and Media
Relations at The Black & Decker Corporation. I
was surprised to see a reference to a 'Black &
Decker scandal' in the online News-Record. I
then realized this refers to two individuals
named Black and Decker, not our company. I
understand that this seems like a clever
reference, easily understood when reading the
article. However, I wouldn't want people casually
searching the internet to think we were involved
in some scandal. Please refrain from using our
company name in this context.

Thanks,

Roger A. Young"

Sorry about that, Black & Decker. From now on, we'll refer to our Black and Decker as Mr. X and Mr. Y.

I liked Barack Obama's speech in Philly Tuesday (see today's edit), but his promises about Iraq confuse me.

"I will end this war," he told a small, selected audience in Fayetteville yesterday, adding that in January he'll begin a 16-month drawdown of U.S. troops.

I also heard a radio clip where he said, "I'll bring an end to it in 2009." That would be before he completes the military withdrawal.

Although that doesn't add up, it's not what confuses me. Rather, it's how he equates removing U.S. troops to ending the war.

I mean, if you could "end the war" simply by getting our soldiers out of there, couldn't even George Bush think of that? How about Gen. David Patraeus, who seems to know something about military matters?

Frankly, I don't think Obama really means "end the war" when he says "end the war." I think he's just talking about getting us out of it, and then whatever happens is no concern of ours.

But on this subject I found Obama's former foreign policy advisor Samantha Power more credible when she told a BBC interviewer:

"You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009. He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. senator. He will rely upon a plan -- an operational plan -- that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn’t have daily access now, as a result of not being the president. So to think -- it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, 'Well, I said it, therefore I'm going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.' "

Like Bush, Obama portrays his Iraq policy as a matter of U.S. national security. But, naturally, they hold opposite views on that point. Bush says it's better for U.S. security to "win" the war in Iraq, and Obama says it's better to get out.

Bush's credibility on the issue is about zero, but he stakes his legacy on the contention that his actions since 9/11 have made America safer. Obama says we're not safer, insisting instead that the war in Iraq has stirred up more terrorists against us. We've been fighting the wrong battle, he charges. He vows to commit more military resources to Afghanistan and the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

Going on seven years since 9/11, it's an embarrassment that Osama bin Laden is still loose and issuing threats. Securing Afghanistan is an important unfinished job. But here's my worry: If we transfer our military focus from Iraq to Afghanistan, won't the terrorists do the same? Will we have 100,000 or more troops in Afghanistan for years and year, with future presidential candidates promising to "end the war" there?

I'm not faulting Obama. He didn't start any of this but, if he's our next president, he'll have to clean it up -- and I'm not sure anyone can. But that's just it. Knowing how nearly impossible it's going to be to reach a positive outcome in Iraq, it really confuses me how a candidate can make it sound so easy. End the war in 2009? If only.

A side note to the flap about Greensboro's proposed new city council districts:

If this were Winston-Salem, Durham, Charlotte, Raleigh or Wilmington, Justice Department review would not be required. Only 40 North Carolina counties are covered jurisdictions under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Greensboro must be considered more likely to deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race or color or membership in a language minority group than other large North Carolina cities and therefore demands Justice Department supervision. Or so it's thought in Washington.

Seems like an anachronism to me.

So, is Good Friday a holiday or not?

Traffic was light this morning, but Guilford County school buses were on the road. Some other systems, like Davidson County, began their "spring break" today.

It's not a federal government or Postal Service holiday.

State of North Carolina, yes.

City of Greensboro, yes.

Guilford County government, yes.

So, why, if today is a holiday for the state of North Carolina and Guilford County, are Guilford County schools open?

Private businesses are definitely a mixed bag. The News & Record reflects that. We're not taking a holiday, although we have in the past.

Is the Good Friday holiday fading away? Is it too Christian for an increasingly secular and multicultural society?

There have been legal challenges to government observance of Good Friday as an improper establishment of religion. Apparently, the Supreme Court hasn't bought that argument.

I like the idea of a three-day weekend at Easter, but many of you will remember that in North Carolina the third day for a long time was Monday rather than Friday. Wikipedia notes that Easter Monday was a state holiday in North Carolina from 1935 to 1987. Has it really been 21 years since that was dropped?

Well, whenever it starts and ends for you, have a great weekend. And Happy Easter.

A 17-year-old boy in Charlotte dies after he's tasered by a police officer, the Observer reports today.

The incident is under investigation, but there are two huge questions:

Was use of the stun gun necessary?

Why did an otherwise healthy young man die?

Tasers have a legitimate place as a law-enforcement tool, but all agencies should take a keen interest in the answers to those questions.

Thanks largely to the "Don't tase me, bro" incident in Florida last year, we've gotten the idea that use of this weapon is kind of funny. I guess that was wrong.

I expected Earl Jones to come up with some reason to vote against expelling state Rep. Thomas Wright yesterday, however flimsy. He didn't disappoint.

From Mark's story:

"You have to be practical, fair and just regarding this," Jones said. "We're talking about the type of punishment, and I think it's wrong to just trump and veto the voters who are going to go to the poll in the May 6 primary and decide Rep. Wright's fate."

Gotcha, just leave it up to the voters. Which means let the voters set the ethical standards for the legislature. A person might be an obvious crook, but if the voters of his district elect him, well heck, nothing we can do about it.

Jones was one of five representatives (including Wright himself) voting against expulsion. That should tell Speaker Joe Hackney whom NOT to ever appoint to the House Ethics Committee.

I was more surprised by Maggie Jeffus' explanation for supporting a reprimand as first option:

"I felt like we might give that a chance and see. In my own mind, I think censure and expulsion are both very serious and in the end would have the same kind of result," Jeffus said.

Um, no, not the same kind of result. Censure (or reprimand), he stays. Expulsion, he goes.

In the end, Jeffus did vote for expulsion, so she's a little wiser than Jones.

The Wright expulsion was a big step for the House of Representatives as it tries to cleanse itself of the Jim Black slime. Most of its members seem to get it now, but there are still some who don't.

Note: Excellent reporting on Mark's blog.

Update: The N&O finds something in common among Wright's supporters ... and Wright.

Dear Skybus Customer:

Your upcoming flight has changed due to a Skybus schedule change.

Original Flight
Friday, June 27, 2008 - Flight 311
Departs: Greensboro, NC 7:36 PM
Arrives: Fort Myers (Punta Gorda, FL) 9:23 PM

New Flight
Friday, June 27, 2008 - Flight 317
Departs: Greensboro, NC 10:20 AM
Arrives: Fort Myers (Punta Gorda, FL) 12:07 PM

Because you have been moved to a different Skybus flight, you have several options from which to choose.

Remain on Re-Accommodated Flight:
If you wish to remain on your re-accommodated flight, please check this option.

Choose Different Flight -- No Charge
You may change the date(s) of your flight(s) as long as it is to the same destination and travel begins within 5 days of your original your flight. There is no change fee for this option.

Cancel & Request A Refund
You can cancel your entire trip and receive a full refund towards your credit card.

Dear Skybus,

I don't blame you for cutting back, given the skyrocketing fuel prices. But this is disappointing.

This was my first Skybus booking. Unfortunately, the 10:20 a.m. flight isn't a good alternative. I didn't plan to use a vacation day for a quick weekend trip to attend a wedding in Florida. So, it looks like I'll have to refuse the early flight, cancel the return flight on Sunday, apply for a refund and look for another airline or else stay home.

I still like your business model, and I hope I can fly you out of PTIA soon. But, the way things are going now, we all might be spending more time on the ground.

I really, really hate this.

Davidson is apparently staging a big comeback against Georgetown, and I'm not seeing it.

After showing the first half from Raleigh, CBS seems to have decided I'd rather see a couple of other games.

And not just on its primary channel but on ALL THREE channels available. All are showing Tennessee-Butler.

Now that's a good game, but if I wanted to watch it, I wouldn't need more than one channel.

I mean, what's the point of having three channels if they're all carrying the same game?

And what's the reason for showing the first half of Davidson-Georgetown if CBS isn't going to give me the second half?

I'm steamed, and I know I'll REALLY be ticked when CBS does the same thing to me during the Carolina game later this afternoon.

Update: Finally, with about 5 minutes to go CBS returns in time for us to see Davidson take the lead behind an unbelievable performance by Stephen Curry ... then cuts away again with the promise to "get you back when the action heats up." Heats up? What do they want, thermonuclear meltdown?

Update: Congratulations, Davidson. Coming from 17 down in the second half to win over 2-seed Georgetown, 74-70. Impressive.

Too bad CBS didn't show most of that second half.

I'm keeping my radio nearby for the Carolina game. Woody won't leave me stranded.

Update: Inside Higher Ed picks Davidson to win it all ... in athletic/academic performance.

"When first told of Neal's statements, Hagan said she didn't understand exactly what she was being accused of doing."

That was my reaction, too, as I read Mark's report yesterday about Democratic Senate candidate Jim Neal's complaint that an "inside machine ... is workinig very hard to lock down the money in the state."

It initially sounded like whining from a little-known, first-time candidate who, not surprisingly, is having trouble raising money. Potential donors naturally would be skeptical about sinking money into the campaign of a guy who stands little chance of knocking off Elizabeth Dole, especially when the same potential donors are being hit up by better-known Democrats like Bev Perdue, Richard Moore and, yes, Kay Hagan, the party's leading Senate candidate.

But Neal seems to be saying more.

"When pressed on the notion that Neal said she was using her legislative power to influence the flow of campaign money and endorsements, Hagan said that wasn't true." Mark wrote.

Neal says she's using her legislative power -- an appropriations chairmanship in the state Senate -- to influence the flow of campaign money and endorsements?

As in, "Support me and I'll return the favor through the legislative appropriations process"?

Or, "Support Neal and I'll punish you through the legislative appropriations process"?

There are words for that: Bribery and extortion.

No wonder Hagan said she was "shocked" by the allegation.

"Neither Neal nor his campaign staffers would provide the names of those who might have been coerced as described," Mark reported. "So it's unclear whether potential supporters are facing unusual pressure or just feeling the typical arm-twisting from a political establishment backing one of its own."

Or maybe potential supporters are simply making a choice that doesn't favor Neal. His very bitter response is indeed difficult to understand.

If Mayor Yvonne Johnson