Why Obama opted to go to New Orleans

It was disappointing when President Obama zipped in and out of New Orleans last week without so much as a touch-and-go landing on the coasts of Mississippi and Alabama.

But was it surprising? Or were we naive to think that Barack Obama would do anything other than follow the political dictum that says you reward your supporters and punish, or at least snub, your opponents?

Let's face it: States don't get much redder than Alabama and Mississippi, with our Republican governors and U.S. senators who are highly regarded within the GOP.

We didn't support Obama in 2008, and I wouldn't look for him to carry either state next time.

Louisiana is a red state, too, although one of its senators is a Democrat. But New Orleans is a creature unto itself, with a wildly diverse population led by an African-American Democrat as mayor.

And, frankly, New Orleans is the darling of the national Democratic Party, in large part because the Crescent City was treated so shabbily by the Bush administration after Hurricane Katrina.

The hard truth probably is that Obama's staff, knowing he was going to be in College Station on Friday for a forum with former President George H.W. Bush, decided it would be conven-

ient to schedule Obama's first presidential visit Thursday to the central Gulf Coast.

The staff probably picked New Orleans because their man could score more political points and photo ops there than in Biloxi or

Bayou La Batre.

Think about it: Why reward Mississippi's Gov. Haley Barbour or Alabama's Gov. Bob Riley with a place in the presidential spotlight?

In south Alabama, we know something about how presidents can treat states that don't support them.

Ask any long-time Mobilian what happened to Brookley Field in the 1960s.

They'll recall for you that in 1964, when "Landslide Lyndon" Johnson slaughtered Barry Goldwater, Alabama was one of five states in the so-called "solid South" that voted Republican. (Mississippi was among the five, too.)...