Red-State Teat-Sucking Rendered Invisible. Conservatives Howl Tyranny.

In response to this graphic in my reprised post from yesterday:

Commenter rjs points us to this depressing Economist post — the government data source for this graphic has gone dark, part of the Obama administration’s cost-cutting measures.

The real irony I discover, though, is to find right-wingers at The Heritage Foundation screaming about the Obama administration’s hypocrisy and opacity for cutting that budget item (which they would undoubtedly label “redundant” and “wasteful” if it hadn’t been cut).

With the Obama Administration outspending all prior Administrations while adding to the astronomical federal debt, the fact that taxpayers can no longer rely on access to where and how their money is being spent at the county and city level is disquieting. So far, Administration officials have been able to brush the lack of transparency under the rug. For the good of the country, that needs to change. Citizens should demand to know what is happening to their tax dollars once they are sucked up by the federal government’s vacuum cleaner.

Indeed — including which states, exactly, are doing the sucking.

Another example:

The Transparently Hypocritical Barack Obama | RedState

You just can’t make this shit up.

Cross-posted at Angry Bear.







4 responses to “Red-State Teat-Sucking Rendered Invisible. Conservatives Howl Tyranny.”

  1. Ted K Avatar
    Ted K

    Nothing to say here, other than this is an absolutely outstanding post. I’m not a fan of The Economist magazine (they once tried to charge me and phone hounded me for a year’s subscription after I got 1 “free issue” and declined the OPTIONAL subscription by e-mail within 2 days of getting the free issue). Also, they are like the pink paper (Financial Times) constantly sucking the moisture from big bankers’ anus for advertisement revenue on their pages.

    But this is frightening, depressing etc and very worthy of their article and your post. How can we make solid judgements on policy and which official to elect without solid info to base it on?? Maybe this answers the question in of itself of why they cut it. I’m a Democrat, but it’s crap like this that makes it ever harder for me to TROD my feet to vote for Obama in November.

  2. Hermonta Godwin Avatar
    Hermonta Godwin

    A Red state is simply a state that had 50% + 1 people vote for the Republican candidate. Does this imply that those who voted Republican are the reason that a state absorbs more federal money than it sends out?

  3. Asymptosis Avatar

    @Hermonta Godwin No, it’s really about policies. But those policies are in place because the people of the states voted to put in place politicians who put those policies in place.