Sarah Huckabee Sanders' State of the Union Response Offers a Grim Glimpse of the GOP's Future
Biden's speech offered plenty of opportunity to present a counter-narrative to continued taxes and spending. Instead Sanders went a different direction.

Although President Joe Biden has yet to formally announce whether he will run for reelection in 2024, last night's State of the Union seemed to indicate what issues would dominate Democratic politics over the next 18 months: higher taxes, economic protectionism, and a bold stance against "resort fees."
Unfortunately, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders's response speech suggested that the Republican counter will be light on policy and heavy on grievances.
The State of the Union response is a thankless job. After the president delivers a comprehensive address to Congress from the House chamber, a rival politician must try to match the pageantry in a fraction of the time against a more austere backdrop. But it can also offer the opportunity to draw a direct contrast to the president's agenda.
Sanders' 15-minute rebuttal was not interested in brass tacks, as evidenced by lines like, "I'm the first woman to lead my state, and [Biden is] the first man to surrender his presidency to a woke mob that can't even tell you what a woman is."
Sanders could have used the speech to challenge the Biden administration's ambitious spending proposals even while inflation and the national debt remain serious problems. Instead, she touted that her first act as governor included banning the word "Latinx" from official government use and forbidding schools from teaching critical race theory. This conservative fixation may or may not be of any consequence to most voters.
Sanders briefly addressed COVID-19 policy by saying that she "repealed COVID orders and said 'never again' to authoritarian mandates and shutdowns." But the majority of her speech was a missed opportunity. When Sanders mentioned Democrats' "trillions in reckless spending and mountains of debt," it was to decry that the spending had failed to stop "fentanyl [from] pouring across our southern borders."
As CBS News anchor John Dickerson noted, the last time a Democratic president had a new Republican House majority occurred in 2011, when Rep. Paul Ryan (R–Wisc.), chairman of the House Budget Committee, delivered the response to President Obama's State of the Union. Ryan spent much of the speech talking about the economy, the deficit, and the national debt. He also noted that Republicans and Democrats constituted a choice between limited government or a government whose "growth is left unchecked and unchallenged."
Sanders, on the other hand, presented the choice of Republicans and Democrats as a contrast between "freedom and peace" and "woke fantasies," where "Big Government colludes with Big Tech to strip away the most American thing there is: your freedom of speech."
Sanders is unlikely to be a force in 2024 national politics, but the speech signaled what Republicans would likely focus on over the next 18 months. As Josh Barro wrote last week, Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush each provided optimistic versions of Republican governance, proposing national prosperity and "compassionate conservatism," respectively. But today's Republican party is characterized by "mostly bad, bitter feelings;" corporations and the military are now "woke" and should each be brought to heel; by legislative force, if necessary. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is broadly popular in his state and a likely 2024 presidential candidate, has turned this ethos into a series of punitive steps against disfavored groups and companies.
To the extent that last night was a preview of the next 18 months, it bodes poorly for the 2024 presidential contest.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
If you're going to write hit pieces like this, Lancaster, please find a job opening at the NYT, WaPo, MSDNC, DailyKos, or HuffPo.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, i'm now creating over $35,100 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,100 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link------------------------------------>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.NETPAYFAST.COM
Unfortunately, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders's response speech suggested that the Republican counter will be light on policy and heavy on grievances.
You say that now but wait until the GOP yanks out HUNTER BIDENS PENIS again.
A few years ago, you got your original “Sarah Palin’s Buttplug” account banned for posting kiddy porn to this site. The link below details all the evidence surrounding that ban. A decent person would honor that ban and stay away from Reason. Instead SPB keeps showing up, acting as if all people should just be ok with a kiddy-porn-posting asshole hanging around.
https://reason.com/2022/08/06/biden-comforts-the-comfortable/?comments=true#comment-9635836
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK. 🙂
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.SALARYBEZ.COM
"All the evidence"...
Why don't you just admit that you have no evidence?
You were all so shocked and disgusted by what you saw that you completely forgot to preserve any of it before Reason inexplicably nuked it for all time. Wasn't that unfortunate!
And now you claim that the weak gruel you now religiously copypasta after every SPB2 post is "all the evidence". How pathetic.
This you, admitting being banned for posting kiddie porn?
https://reason.com/2019/02/26/bernie-sanders-cnn-townhall-foreign-poli/?comments=true#comment-7690893
moneyshot 4 years ago
Reason has my email address.
For all I know some conservative asswipe in IT made an editorial decision on his own.
fuck him — and you too.
Here’s Sandra (OBL) referencing your ban.
https://web.archive.org/web/20181225135006/https://reason.com/blog/2018/12/24/brickbat-the-last-place-you-look#comment_7608665
Sevo|12.24.18 @ 10:08AM|#
Hey, is turd banned?
If the ban-hammer starts falling on the lairs, Tony and the Hihn-crowd’s in trouble.
OpenBordersLiberal-tarian|12.24.18 @ 10:24AM|#
If you look in this topic there are several Sarah Palin’s Buttplug posts that have disappeared.
I love Reason, but if they really have banned Mr. Buttplug I think that’s a major mistake. I will try to partially cover his beat by posting links describing how terrible the #DrumpfRecession is, but it won’t be the same because my economics knowledge lags far behind his.
And if you didn't get banned, then why the "2" and the nuked comments?
turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
"You say that now but wait until the GOP yanks out HUNTER BIDENS PENIS again."
You say that now but wait until the GOP yanks out HUNTER and Joe BIDENS pay to play and bribery scandal which you're desperately trying to distract from by screaming about PENIS.
It’s funny how conservatives are obsessed with Hunter’s penis, isn’t it?
We can’t have a conversation about the SOTU without some conservative mentioning how long it probably is, and how thick it is.
We can’t discuss the president without some conservative talking about how it curves slightly up and to the right when erect, with thick, throbbing veins, pulsing in anticipation through his thick foreskin, nestled in a thick bush of public hair, just waiting for someone to grasp it and pleasure it, while receiving its huge girth.
Those conservatives are fucking perverts.
Sanders, on the other hand, presented the choice of Republicans and Democrats as a contrast between "freedom and peace" and "woke fantasies," where "Big Government colludes with Big Tech to strip away the most American thing there is: your freedom of speech."
And right now, if you've bothered to follow the news and get out of your echo chamber, this is what it is. As libertarians, we get pissy and fed up with both parties, but right now, one party has some nuts, while the other is busy driving us off a 1,000 foot cliff and laughing about it. One party has a debate about whether we should support Ukraine or not while the other gleefully wants to start WWIII with Russia.
I’m still waiting for someone on the right to explain how tech companies, who own these properties, are subject to First Amendment speech requirements. You’d think libertarians, of all people, would understand that distinction, but Reason.com proves otherwise.
Nothing says “freedom and peace” like stripping women of the right to reproductive healthcare, banning African American and LGBT history in schools, and banning drag queens. But I guess if you can convincingly label something as “woke,” you can violate a person’s civil rights with impunity.
If they want to censor remove their Section 230 protection.
This shawn_dude is a chemjeff sock if I ever saw one. His whole comment was chemjeff 101.
1. He pretends that the real issue isn't government agencies illegally making censorship demands and creating mechanisms to censor, but rather that the companies acquiesced (muh private company).
2. He then shifts to baby killing, reworked Nazi race theory and child castration in order to to redirect the conversation.
How are those two things related?
https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/
"I’m still waiting for someone on the right to explain how tech companies, who own these properties, are subject to First Amendment speech requirements..."
Dooooood, fail at misdirection, doooooooooooood.
Fuck off and die, doooooood.
Tech companies cannot engage in censorship on behalf of the government. They become joint state actors and are beholden to the same standards the government is.
Rest of your comment:
There are two individuals involved in an abortion, and the rights of both must be weighed.
Of course the state can determine the curriculum of the schools it runs. Are you suggesting it can't? Are you suggesting that an employee can do or say whatever they want on their employer's time and the employer has no recourse?
Where have drag shows been banned? Whose rights have been violated in any of these situations?
Nonsense. They can engage in all the censorship they so desire.
The government cannot.
I’m still waiting for someone on the right to explain how tech companies, who own these properties, are subject to First Amendment speech requirements.
As private companies, they're not subject to the First Amendment. Unfortunately, those selfsame companies decided to collude with the United States government, which is subject to the First Amendment, to censor speech. That qualifies them as joint state actors, subject to the same laws as those with whom they colluded.
This isn't about right or left. That employees of Twitter employed Jira to secretly communicate with the FBI to discuss the removal of content is pretty fucking damning.
Nonsense. Their First Amendment rights do not terminate as soon as they coincide with whatever the government wants them to say.
Deal with it.
Comment referenced:
Big Government colludes with Big Tech to strip away the most American thing there is: your freedom of speech.”
I’m still waiting for someone on the right to explain how tech companies, who own these properties, are subject to First Amendment speech requirements.
First note how he changed "free speech" to "First Amendment". Our free speech traditions are much broader than the FA.
Then note this:
You’d think libertarians, of all people, would understand that distinction, but Reason.com proves otherwise.
Isn't it amusing people who fail to understand clear distinctions, or pretend to do so, use their own failure as a basis to wrongly criticize others ' inability to make important distinctions?
Of course this also ignores that government is colluding with businesses to achieve this end, which is specifically a FA violation. What sloppy thinking.
I am baffled that someone still doesn't understand the concept that free speech is not primarily a First Amendment issue; it is primarily a liberal societal good that all, including private tech companies, should embrace.
So it's all hands on deck for the left today?
Pretty much every day.
Someone's got actually govern the country now that the right has largely abdicated that responsibility in favor of tantrums and slogans.
The Dems controlled all the levers of power the last 2 years.
bro (R) has been in charge of 1/9 of the government for like 3 weeks already it should all be fixed by now.
Someone’s got actually govern the country
Why?
So, do you prefer the toe or the heel when you lick jackboots?
It's Jeff. He wants it all.
>>But the majority of her speech was a missed opportunity.
telling people what they should have said is a fool's errand.
Really impressive that you got the Deathsantis reference in there Joe considering the fact he has nothing to do with Sander's speech and hasn't declared his intention to run for national office. Bit of a non sequitur but I like that whole stream of consciousness thing you've got going on. As long as we know that Republicans are pouncing it's all good. Bravo!
"I'm the first woman to lead my state, and [Biden is] the first man to surrender his presidency to a woke mob that can't even tell you what a woman is."
It's all shallow stage theater but honestly that's a pretty good line.
too long (twss) but yes.
I suspect it's always been shallow stage theater, they're just dispensing with the pretense now. Which if I'm being honest, I actually prefer if for no other reason the lulz. That and actually seeing that all of our so-called leaders are just vapid, shallow idiot losers is preferable to them trying to keep up the illusion that they're somehow "better" than everyone else.
Instead, she touted that her first act as governor included banning the word "Latinx" from official government use and forbidding schools from teaching critical race theory.
PUBLIC schools. Huge and relevant distinction here.
Why is banning CRT from public schools such a huge problem for Reason? CRT is a Marxist theory that's completely opposed to libertarian principles. It also has no educational value, so why should taxpayers pay for it?
Because parents have a right to have public schools teach other people's kids to be racist Marxists. Maybe you need to study up on libertarianism.
CRT isn't in opposition to progressive libertine values though, as espoused by ENB, Lancaster, Shackford, Mingo-Mango-Mongo, Bailey, Boehm, Camp, etc. These guys are not libertarians.
CRT is a Marxist theory that’s completely opposed to libertarian principles.
The charitable answer is that they're just ignorant and don't realize that CRT's entire intellectual underpinning comes from Marxist thought (if you can call anything Marxists do "thought"). Maybe someone should point them in the direction of James Lindsey's New Discourses?
But I'm having a harder and harder time being charitable these days, so maybe they know full well that it's a bunch Marxist bullshit and either don't care or agree with it.
Same reason why they pretend that the problem is with drag queens and not their bizarre desire to perform in front of children.
Not really an important distinction since none of the K-12 were teaching actual Critical Race Theory. CRT as defined by right-wing propaganda is boiled down to "anything related to African Americans that we don't want our kids to know." Private schools can still teach this stuff if they want to, but most private K-12 are white, racially segregated refuges for parents who don't want their kids learning about or even learning *with* black people.
But the South is gonna South. They'll always find new ways to keep the Confederacy alive.
The Confederates were all Democrats.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/yes-critical-race-theory-is-being-taught-in-public-schools
https://www.thecollegefix.com/yes-crt-is-taught-in-k-12-schools-heres-how/
https://spectator.org/yes-crt-is-being-taught-in-public-schools/
https://www.foxnews.com/us/crt-prevalent-american-public-schools-despite-claims-contrary-study-shows
https://reason.com/2021/07/06/critical-race-theory-nea-taught-in-schools/
The National Education Association (NEA) appears to have accepted the conservative framing of CRT: namely, that it's not merely confined to academia but is in fact also being taught in K-12 schools. And the NEA thinks this is a good thing that should be defended.
At its yearly annual meeting, conducted virtually over the past few days, the NEA adopted New Business Item 39, which essentially calls for the organization to defend the teaching of critical race theory.*
"It is reasonable and appropriate for curriculum to be informed by academic frameworks for understanding and interpreting the impact of the past on current society, including critical race theory," says the item.
I suspect you're responding to a dipshit who won't bother reading any of the links you've provided. Easier to just continue on in his sad little bubble.
Teacher unions and all public sector unions should be illegal.
"Not really an important distinction since none of the K-12 were teaching actual Critical Race Theory..."
And the USSR wasn't actual communism, right. dooooooood?
Dooooood, fail at misdirection, doooooooooooood.
Fuck off and die, doooooood.
Look up "praxis" and disabuse yourself of your fuck filled head.
Not really an important distinction since none of the K-12 were teaching actual Critical Race Theory.
This is correct. Schools are implementing CRT, not teaching it.
Private schools can still teach this stuff if they want to, but most private K-12 are white, racially segregated refuges for parents who don’t want their kids learning about or even learning *with* black people.
It's hard to find people less in touch with reality than proggie commenters.
Is the ideological capture by the progressive, Marxist left of every civic institution not a libertarian issue?
Opposing it is a violation of the NAP. And racist.
No, but talking about it is Culture War-ing.
If libertarians have a strong case to make to the public and can convince the majority, or even a plurality, of them to vote libertarian, that would solve this "issue."
How many libertarians are elected to state and federal legislative bodies? One, two handfuls at most?
Maybe the issue isn't the "Marxist left" here but the inability for libertarians to navigate politics in a democratic country.
They aren't called sheeple for nothing.
Or the problem could be both. The Marxist left has taken control of every government bureacracy AND libertarians have been unable to navigate politics in a democratic country, probably because they're too busy worrying about drag queens, hookers, and illegal immigrants.
If lefty shits had any programs that didn't need to be enforced by guns, that would solve the issue, dooooooood.
Fuck off and die, doooooood.
It's a good time for the great taste of government dick.
--shawn_dude
Local reaction from a suburban Republican of my acquaintance:. "Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan didn't sound like hicks and morons. Now they put forth Bush, Trump, Huckabee, Sen. Kennedy types. The GOP will never win back the suburban snob swing voter."
until they have to choose Kamala. Then we'll see.
Who are you kidding? Some like Chicago Democrats would vote for Adolf Hitler if he had a “D” after his name.
/Apologies for the major cynicism here.
In the 1986 primaries the Chicago democrats actually voted for Larouchie characters because the real democrats running had "ethnic" names. Ruined Democrats Adlai Stevenson's(D) chances in the governor's race.
Exhibit A: John Fetterman.
Fetterman, prior to his stroke, was wiping the floor with his non-local competitor, Dr Oz.
Nearly any politician, no matter how weak, no matter from which party, should be able to single-handedly trounce a carpet bagging outsider with a tarnished reputation for selling bogus products to drooling idiots. Oz wasn't even an actual resident of Pennsylvania. Don't blame the Dems and swing voters for not electing a charlatan; blame the party that nominated the charlatan.
(Seriously. What does it say about the GOP's perception of conservative Pennsylvanians if they looked at Oz and said "that's the guy they'd like to vote for!")
Sorry but voting for brain damaged drooling idiots seems to be a thing for Democrats. I know that makes you defensive and sad. My bad.
Oz won a crowded primary by less than 1,000 votes. Endorsed by Trump, Oz exemplifies the party voter who refuses to take general election electability into account.
Which is fine, but almost guarantees the GOP will be a permanent minority in most Northeastern/MidAtlantic states.
"Fetterman, prior to his stroke, was wiping the floor with his non-local competitor, Dr Oz."
He wasn't even the candidate before his stroke.
"Fetterman, prior to his stroke, was wiping the floor with his non-local competitor, Dr Oz...
Doood, and lefty shit -piles like you voted for the stroke victim, doooood.
Fuck off and die, doooooood.
Before his stroke, Fetterman was a trust fund grifter who duped the proletariat with rough couture. As a senator, Fetterman is a trust fund grifter who can't read words.
And writing the response to the response is a fools job. Of course commenting on the fools job is idiotic but I'm on the shitter.
Home income solution to enable everyone to work online and receive weekly payments to bank acct. Earn over $500 every day and get payouts every week straight to account bank. My last month of income was $30,390 and all I do is work up to 4 hours a day on my computer. Easy work and steady income are great with this job.
More information……………………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
You guys, with your internet rando feuds crack me up.
Sanders, on the other hand, presented the choice of Republicans and Democrats as a contrast between "freedom and peace" and "woke fantasies," where "Big Government colludes with Big Tech to strip away the most American thing there is: your freedom of speech."
This is an completely accurate characterization of the modern democrat mainstream. how is this even a question?
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is broadly popular in his state and a likely 2024 presidential candidate, has turned this ethos into a series of punitive steps against disfavored groups and companies.
"Stop brainwashing kids in public schools with your trans cult" is not a "punitive step"
Targeting a corporation that disagrees with him: censorship
Targeting disfavored minorities with a high suicide rate: bullying
Targeting African American history: racist
Targeting LGBT citizens: homophobic
Targeting the speech of teachers and librarians: censorship
DeSantis knows his audience, I'll give him that much.
What does queer theory have to do with African American history?
EVERYTHING IS SO TERRIBLE AND UNFAIR!!!!!, dude.
Haha. What a whiney doosh.
"Targeting a corporation that disagrees with him: censorship"
Removing special privileges from a multi-billion dollar behemoth. Treating them, well, every other company in the country.
"Targeting disfavored minorities with a high suicide rate: bullying"
How fucking evil are you to want to mutilate the mentally ill?
"Targeting African American history: racist"
This is a lie.
"Targeting LGBT citizens: homophobic"
This is a lie as well.
"Targeting the speech of teachers and librarians: censorship"
Out of curiosity, do you have original thoughts or do you just always churn out lame talking points with no semblance in reality?
Dooooooo
“Targeting a corporation that disagrees with him: censorship
Lie: bullying
Lie: racist
Lie: homophobic
Lie: censorship”
One out of 5 ain't good.
Fuck off and die, doooooood.
Once again we see the left's only tactic is claiming everyone who disagrees with the is racist / sexist / homophobic. They're so intellectually bankrupt they can't understand reality.
Ah, that explains it--you're a bigot. Should things go kinetic, I have an odd feeling it won't be long before someone decides your best used as an example.
Is the 2024 Libertarian candidate really going to run on CRT and tranny indoctrination in public schools? Because "SPOILER ALERT" if that guy takes votes from the dems the staff here is going to vote for Biden again, though not so reluctantly or strategically.
None of these people ever talk about liberty.
"As Josh Barro wrote last week, Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush each provided optimistic versions of Republican governance, proposing national prosperity and "compassionate conservatism," respectively."
Libertarians bemoaning George W. Bush not being in power.
Truly never thought I'd see that happen.
It is the truth: You will love whatever Republican is no risk of being in power.
I really loved that line, extolling the virtues of George W. Bush because he said nice things. Look where his "optimistic" words got us.
Reason writers are very stupid, emotionally driven children who believe that nice words are more important than good actions and good governance.
Yeah, arguably his nice words should hold up well over that whole PATRIOT Act and Iraq War thing.
What is Medicare Part D, chopped spending?
Did she talk about how we need to expand our oil infrastructure because we're going to need for at least TEN more years?
Home income solution to enable everyone to work online and receive weekly payments to bank acct. Earn over $500 every day and get payouts every week straight to account bank. My last month of income was $30,390 and all I do is work up to 4 hours a day on my computer. Easy work and steady income are great with this job.
More information……………………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
Had Sanders gone on about tax cuts, deregulation, balancing the budget and spending cuts, people would have changed channels and watched "Mayberry RFD" reruns. The reason is obvious, Republicans never follow up on these things except for Trump whose name is now a curse because of his "I won 2020 in a landslide" delusion.
Parents' control of their kids' education is one issue where the Republicans could have an edge. That's the only thing that might get the attention of voters because a couple of governors have actually implemented programs where education money follows the student, not the teachers union. Calling this a culture war is a vicious lie.
Another Reason woke article. The bolshies need to be crushed. Reason needs to get on the liberty train and clam down about child sacrifice (abortion) and open borders (no country has open borders) and sexual mutilation of kids (trannies). The war is against cultural marxists, globalist authoritarians, war mongers, and central banks. If we can end the Fed and stop foreign interventionism..it is worth way more than no limits on abortion.
"Ryan spent much of the speech talking about the economy, the deficit, and the national debt. He also noted that Republicans and Democrats constituted a choice between limited government or a government whose "growth is left unchecked and unchallenged."
I assume that this is intended to be funny because those issues were never touched by the Republicans' presidential candidate in 2012 - Mitt "Obama Clone" Romney. They both agreed on the TARP, the bank bailouts and RomneyCare which was the prototype for ObamaCare.
Look at how hard and fast came the denials by Republicans of any intention to change Medicare or Social Security in any way, despite the impending bankruptcies of both. They did everything but offer to pay for Hunter's drugs and hookers if only Biden would stop talking about Social Security.
I haven’t watched a State of the Union speech in 20+ years, or the response, but it sounds like she hit the main points (except for pretending that fentanyl can only come over one of the 4 borders, and not be produced domestically). Just have to gloss over the part about the Repubs not actually cutting spending, and giving the Dems a new baseline to build on.
"As CBS News anchor John Dickerson noted, the last time a Democratic president had a new Republican House majority occurred in 2011, when Rep. Paul Ryan (R–Wisc.), chairman of the House Budget Committee, delivered the response to President Obama's State of the Union. Ryan spent much of the speech talking about the economy, the deficit, and the national debt. He also noted that Republicans and Democrats constituted a choice between limited government or a government whose "growth is left unchecked and unchallenged.""
And we all remember well the Republican wave that swept the country after Ryan's speech! Man he really turned the tide. We should do that again!!
He’s Jeff.