Of course it is. The ridiculousness of your position is that there is no "federal money" - only money that comes from the citizens of states. So if the federal government subverts federalism by withholding money, so should the states.
Just the opposite.
If the states subvert the Supremacy Clause, the federal government has no obligation to send them money that won't be spent on the intended purpose.
You want to take this one specific incident and generalize it into a whole different topic. Fine. But you can do it without my participation.