Why Republicans heckled Joe Biden’s State of the Union speech


Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) gives a thumbs down during President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address on February 7, 2023, in Washington, DC. | Win McNamee/Getty Images

The frustrated GOP response to Biden’s State of the Union speech was all about the third rail of American politics.

There were boos, heckles, and jeers on Tuesday in Washington. It wasn’t an open mic night at a comedy club. It was the State of the Union.

Joe Biden’s second formal State of the Union address to Congress was a pugnacious and, at times, partisan speech that met with a heated response from Republicans.

It wasn’t just the prepared official Republican response from Sarah Sanders, the newly elected governor of Arkansas who had served as a top press aide to Donald Trump, which focused on hot-button culture-war issues. Sanders argued “the dividing line in America is no longer between right or left. The choice is between normal or crazy,” and harped on Biden’s surrender to “a woke mob that can’t even tell you what a woman is.”

Instead, Biden’s suggestion that Republicans wanted to get rid of Social Security referencing a proposal from Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) to let all government programs sunset after five years unless explicitly reauthorized, drew loud and angry responses. Although Biden caveated this by saying that only some Republicans want to take away Social Security and Medicare, nearly all of them yelled at him or booed at the implication that they would risk touching the biggest third rail in American politics. Both Speaker Kevin McCarthy and former President Donald Trump have insisted that Republicans would not do any such thing. During Biden’s speech, Rep. Beth Van Duyne (R-TX) shouted, “Name one, name one,” from her seat.

Afterward, Republicans were insulted at the implication expressed by Biden. Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) told Vox that “it cuts me to the core.” One of the most vocal moderates in the Republican Party, Bacon said Biden assuming all Republicans share Rick Scott’s views on entitlement reform was unfair. “We could say the entire Democrat Party is like [Ilhan] Omar and that wouldn’t be fair either, would it?”

This was echoed by Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA), a longtime McCarthy ally, who noted that when Biden “came out and said [Republicans are] trying to cut Social Security, there were a lot of boos.” He added, “and I thought that that was pretty fair,” though he expressed his dismay at the vocal heckling that Biden faced from some Republicans.

Republicans also showed their discontent with Biden’s adherence to other progressive orthodoxies. There was an outburst of laughter from Republicans when Biden said that the United States will still need oil for the next 10 years — a line that wasn’t in his prepared remarks — which they viewed as deeply unrealistic. Afterward, LaMalfa noted this immediately when he listed his thoughts on the speech. “I would really wish [Biden] had been more realistic when he said we’re going to need oil for 10 years. We’re going to need it for 150 years.”

This doesn’t mean there still isn’t the potential for bipartisan moments in the coming Congress. After all, the first person in the chamber to jump to applaud Biden’s line about cracking down on Big Tech was Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), who is not exactly the model of centrism in modern American politics.

But it does set the stage for a real confrontation over the debt ceiling in the coming months. LaMalfa expressed his hope that Biden and McCarthy could build a relationship in the coming months. He contrasted the Biden of the Obama administration who negotiated a fiscal cliff deal with John Boehner as “Biden 1.0” and the more partisan and progressive Biden of recent years as “Biden 2.0.” And, as for the Biden of tonight, LaMalfa said that was “Biden 1.9.”

Related articles

Epstein girlfriend’s diary reveals rare glimpse of disgraced billionaire: ‘A little boy’



Jeffrey Epstein's former girlfriend revealed a rare glimpse inside the late financier and convicted child offender's life — and how he manipulated women "for connections, for money and for social capital."

Patricia Schmidt, who was a 23-year-old working at Bear Stearns, shared pages from her diary with The New York Times Magazine and, for the first time, spoke publicly about her relationship with Epstein. Schmidt first interacted with Epstein after her boss sent her to his home in 1987.

The diary contains descriptions of her life, the couple's interactions and moments together from the 1980s.

In one remembrance, Epstein had apparently confused Schmidt's mother, whose maiden name was Arlene Dahl, with a former Hollywood starlet with the same name. But that wasn't actually the case and Schmidt never corrected him. In May 1987, he apparently found out and then called her at work to chastise her over it.

"It was terribly awkward," she said. "He sort of felt played."

By February 1988, Schmidt arrived at Epstein's apartment at 1 a.m. where he was on the phone with Eva Andersson, his longtime girlfriend that friends have said "was the love of his life." He lied to Andersson, telling her that he was receiving work materials and passed the phone to Schmidt to try and "back him up."

"Schmidt perceived it as a power play by Epstein, who was seeking not only to appease Andersson but also to show Schmidt that she was not his top priority — and that he was in control of both," according to The Times.

The dynamics between the two and diary entries show the unique ways Epstein attempted to use this "relationship for his advantage."

"On a number of occasions, Schmidt described in her diary how she and Epstein had sex. But other times, she noted his preference for cuddling or kissing on the cheek. 'He was like a little boy almost,'" she said.

In July 1989, Schmidt told Epstein that a married colleague said he liked her. She initially told him in an effort "to remind him of my value" and that another man was interested in her.

But that backfired.

"His response was that Schmidt was being naïve if she thought the man was looking for anything other than sex," according to The Times. "In the diary, Schmidt berated herself for having hurt Epstein."

"In the end, though, she was the one feeling guilty — a sign that Epstein still had the upper hand," The Times reported.

‘Speechless, and Enraged’: Kennedy Family Members Rip Plan to Add Trump’s Name to Kennedy Center

Members of the Kennedy family hit out at President Donald Trump's plan to add his name to the legendary Kennedy Center For The Performing Arts.

The post ‘Speechless, and Enraged’: Kennedy Family Members Rip Plan to Add Trump’s Name to Kennedy Center first appeared on Mediaite.

Did Leavitt say Trump ‘doesn’t care if you’re black, brown, yellow or normal’? Here’s the truth

Online users shared the purported quote from the White House press secretary, beginning with, "President Trump is not racist," in December 2025.