FIERY: Gutfeld Eviscerates "Both Sides" Argument

In partnership with

Trusted by millions. Actually enjoyed by them too.

Most business news feels like homework. Morning Brew feels like a cheat sheet. Quick hits on business, tech, and finance—sharp enough to make sense, snappy enough to make you smile.

Try the newsletter for free and see why it’s the go-to for over 4 million professionals every morning.

Check it out

This is how it's done! On his Fox News show, Greg Gutfeld's fiery response to Jessica Tarlov's attempt to equate the assassination of Charlie Kirk with the 2023 killing of Democratic Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman is a masterclass in shutting down the "both sides" argument that the left so often deploys to deflect from their own failures and excesses. Conservatives have grown increasingly frustrated and angry with the left's refusal to acknowledge the clear asymmetry in political violence and rhetoric, so Gutfeld's outburst is not only justified but necessary. It's a response that many have been waiting to hear, and it's one that is wholeheartedly endorsed.

The context is critical here. Charlie Kirk, a prominent voice of REASON and founder of Turning Point USA, was assassinated on September 10, 2025, by 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, who confessed online with anti-fascist motives. This act of violence was not an isolated incident but part of a disturbing trend of left-wing extremism that has been metastasizing for years. Robinson's actions were driven by a hatred for Kirk's conservative views, a hatred that is increasingly normalized within certain segments of the left. In contrast, the killing of Melissa Hortman in 2023, while tragic, was carried out by a crazy lunatic, and the act that was widely condemned across the political spectrum. Conservatives weren’t out there celebrating a Democrat’s death like so many on the left are doing with Charlie.

Tarlov's attempt to bring up Hortman's killing as a counterpoint to Kirk's assassination is a textbook example of the "both sides" argument, a tactic designed to obscure the truth and create a false equivalence. It's a strategy that the left has perfected, using it to deflect from their own responsibility and to paint conservatives as equally culpable. But as Gutfeld rightly pointed out, this equivalence is a lie. The reality is that political violence in America today is overwhelmingly a left-wing phenomenon. The data bears this out: from the attempted assassinations of President Trump to the shooting of Steve Scalise to the firebombing of the Pennsylvania governor's residence, the left has been responsible for a disproportionate share of the violence. And yet, the media and the left continue to push the narrative that both sides are equally to blame.

Gutfeld's response was a rejection of this narrative, a refusal to play along with the left's game. "Don't play that bullshit with me!" he exclaimed, cutting Tarlov off mid-sentence. "We don't care about your 'both sides' argument. That shit is dead!" These words are not just a personal rebuke but a broader statement of frustration with the left's refusal to engage with reality. The left's beliefs, as Gutfeld pointed out, do not match reality. They are constantly coming up with rationalizations, "what about this, what about that," to avoid facing the truth. But the truth is clear: a young, bright man was assassinated, and we know who did it. The media, which has built this narrative of equivalence, is dead to us on this story. We are dealing with it, and we are going to act.

This is exactly how one should respond when the left brings up the "both sides" argument. Refuse to engage in their game of deflection and denial. Point to the facts, to the data, to the reality on the ground. Remind them that political violence is not a bipartisan issue but a left-wing problem. Challenge them to explain why, if both sides are equally to blame, the left has been responsible for the vast majority of the violence. Demand that they acknowledge the asymmetry, the clear pattern that emerges when you look at the evidence.

The left's response to this challenge is predictable. They will cry foul, claim that one is engaging in "whataboutism," and accuse of ignoring the violence on the right. But this is a straw man argument. One is not ignoring the violence on the right; one is simply pointing out that it is not comparable in scale or frequency to the violence on the left. The left's violence is systematic, ideological, and increasingly normalized. It is not a series of isolated incidents but a broader cultural trend that must be confronted.

Gutfeld's outburst is a call to action, a demand that we stop playing the left's game and start facing the truth. It is a reminder that the "both sides" argument is not just wrong but dangerous, because it allows the left to continue their descent into violence and extremism without consequence. As conservatives, we must reject this argument at every turn, just as Gutfeld did. We must stand firm in our conviction that the left's actions are not equivalent to ours, and we must demand that they be held accountable for their violence.

In the end, Gutfeld's response is a model for how we should all respond to the "both sides" argument. It is a rejection of lies, a demand for truth, and a call to action. It is how it's done, and it is a response that many will continue to echo until the left finally faces the reality of their own extremism.