There's an element of score-settling to Mr. Obama's big-governmentism. Blue-state liberals and their Washington allies must chafe at the affront red states pose to the blue states' enlightened liberalism. Big-government states should be so much better off than smaller-government states. Yet it's blue states, not red states, which are suffering decades-old decline and an economic descent marked by steady population loss and abandonment by commerce and industry.So, does Barack Obama want to redistribute failure so that red states get their fair share?
...
If blue-state Democrats refuse to smell the coffee and raise their standards by lowering government, what's their recourse? How can they hope to stanch the flow of people and capital to the South and West?
That's where the Great Leveler, Barack Obama, comes to the rescue. Mr. Obama's big-governmentism takes a hammer and sickle to red states. Since the likes of David Paterson (NY), Jennifer Granholm (MI), and Ed Rendell (PA) aren't going to change in favor of smaller government and greater liberty, it's time for liberals to load up red states with new health care mandates (many unfunded) and business- and industry-crippling cap-and-trade laws. It's time for much higher taxes generally. It's time for Card Check, which transforms right-to-work states into lockstep adherence to the prerogative of unions to organize.
Source: American Thinker
It is a plausible theory, especially given the "divide and conquer" mentality of the Obama administration - the same administration that is currently fighting a war on American business while consistently snubbing allies like Canada and Israel.