I didn't imply anything of the sort. Your reading comprehension put some pretty interesting words in you head that weren't there.
I love the always bankrupt "lowest contributer (sic) of federal tax revenue" argument. I'm sorry, should everyone receive back the exact amount they put in? What exactly would be the need for a federal government if that was the case? And color me stunned that a state with a really small population, long tenured politicians, and a group of people who the federal government has been using as their "welfare experiment" would be pulling in a disproportionate share of federal tax dollars.
As a liberal, you should be wicked happy that all of those Natives are getting free health care, job assistance, family counseling, etc on you dime. Or is central control of such things unpalatable to you in this instance for some inexplicable reason?
Which is, and always has been, my argument. But you're a hypocritical liberal who somehow thinks because of my residence that I have some kind of say in a matter that your politics are 100% behind.
What exactly are my "multitudes" of opinions? I do love the "don't care" thing now that you've been exposed as absolutely incorrect. Of course you don't care.