Cenk's prediction: Carolyn Maloney will become the ranking Democratic member of the Finance committee.

What happened: Someone writes an article promoting the idea of Carolyn Maloney becoming the ranking Democrat on the Finance committee.

Cenk's triumphant proclamation: I told you so!

Shouldn't he wait to find out whether he's right or not before doing a 5 minute piece on how right he was?

This channel assignment Nazi thinks fail is totally appropriate, just for completely different reasons.

*I Told You So

*Promote

I TOLD YOU SO!

Hate to say I told you so, but I TOLD YOU SO.

>> ^longde:

Update from gothamist:
Last week, a jury voted to dismiss all charges against the McDonald's cashier who used a metal rod to beat up two customers who slapped him and then jumped over the counter at the West Village location in October. While 31-year-old Rayon McIntosh is off the hook, a jury has now voted to indict Denise Darbeau and Rachel Edwards, the two women who jumped over the counter, on burglary charges.
The 24-year-old women were initially charged with misdemeanor trespass in the West 3rd Street McDonald's altercation which took place on October 13. Those charges were increased to burglary, which meant that they allegedly entered the fast food restaurant with intent to commit a crime. “The person who committed a crime got away with a vicious assault,” said defense attorney Harold Baker. “It seems backwards to me...The people who were hurt are now charged with a crime.” Darbeau suffered a fractured skull and a broken right arm in the incident, while Edwards received a gash on her face.

>> ^Auger8:

First I had to remind the cop to dust for prints and then he had a complete "I told you so" attitude after he didn't find any.

Yeah, you should have asked him to check the CCTV camera on the gas station across the street and do the "Zoom/Enhance" thing.

Hate to break it to ya but 90% of law enforcement doesn't waste their time with fingerprints.

Someone broke into my house once through the front door which was a metal door, you'd think there would be a ton of prints. First I had to remind the cop to dust for prints and then he had a complete "I told you so" attitude after he didn't find any. Never did catch the guy either.

Just like I doubt these guys will get caught. Ever!

>> ^jan:

lots of finger prints left behind

I told you so!

>> ^hpqp:
Ugh, this reminds me of Wakefield and the whole anti-vax shtick. Well-intentioned quacks are still quacks,Ugh, we get it. Burzynski's a quack. The thousands of people he has cured are quacks. Wakefield's a quack. And the thousands of parents whose children had a adverse reaction to being vaccinated are quacks too. They're all self-deluded and well-intentioned quacks. Why? Because the authorities told you so. Your blatant arrogance is sickening.
>> ^hpqp:
and making such a biased, *conspiracy-theory based "documentary" filled with anecdotal evidence, confirmation bias and the usual quack argument of "Big Pharma's out to get you and your cash" won't make things any better. Sounds like you haven't watched the film. Maybe you should be more specific on what the "conspiracy-theory" the film is based on? And irony at it's best, your "research" is filled with nothing but "anecdotal evidence" and "confirmation bias"... trying to "debunk" with bunk. Nice job. And I need a citation for "Big Pharma's out to get you and your cash". I don't know where that came from. Of course I'm pretty sure by this point that you're just full of shit.
>> ^hpqp:
Burzynski is a bit harder to debunk than others, because there may be a shred of truth in his claims, but up until now there has been no scientific evidence to support his claims.
Gotta love the double-talk going on here.
>> ^hpqp:
As for raking in the cash, Burzynski definitely has that down pat, demanding 30-60K for his treatments (example: at 963 patients in 1996, @30K/pers.=almost 29mio$... heck, almost enough to make a propagandish film to the glory of one's self!).And you do it again. First you got a problem with the argument you allege the film is making "Big Pharma's out to get you and your cash", and then you turn around and make the same argument against Burzynski. Only the film didn't make the "quack argument" and you did. So who's the real quack here?
>> ^hpqp:
The American and Japanese NCIs, as well as a pharmaceutical company (Sigma-Tau) showed interest in his claims, but were unable to duplicate his results, and not a single phase III randomised clinical study has been done with antineoplastons. The only "evidence" that supports Burzynski's claims come from his own publications, which have been criticised for not respecting basic research protocol (e.g. no control groups, omission of mentioning previous treatments, counting patients who did not even have malignant cancer, etc). Moreover, his claims do not seem to hold on a biochemical level. His credentials are shady as well.Maybe you should watch the film instead of copy-pasting false information from fallacious articles of 10+ years ago.
>> ^hpqp:
I'm all for researching new and out-of-the-box treatments,Clearly. That's why you've had such an open mind here.
>> ^hpqp:
but cannot stand when quacks fill their pockets out of the despair of sick and dying people.
But you can stand when the US government criminally suppresses a discovery that could have helped save millions of lives over the last two decades. Bravo!

>> ^heropsycho:

Before I share my opinion about this, I want to share I have a Master's Degree in history, specializing in 20th Century US and World History.
History doesn't back this up. Show me the world war that started post 2008. 2002? 1987? 1970's...
Why was there a 20 year pause between the end of WWI and WWII when the US economy went to crap just after WWI ended?
This is sheer utter, 100% steaming pile of horsecrap "history".
>> ^Duckman33:
LOl keep your heads in the sand guys. Can't wait till we can say "We told you so." I find it laughable that history backs this up and you guys still vehemently deny this is a possible scenario.



Yeah it's cherry picking.

Before I share my opinion about this, I want to share I have a Master's Degree in history, specializing in 20th Century US and World History.

History doesn't back this up. Show me the world war that started post 2008. 2002? 1987? 1970's...

Why was there a 20 year pause between the end of WWI and WWII when the US economy went to crap just after WWI ended?

This is sheer utter, 100% steaming pile of horsecrap "history".

>> ^Duckman33:

LOl keep your heads in the sand guys. Can't wait till we can say "We told you so." I find it laughable that history backs this up and you guys still vehemently deny this is a possible scenario.

>> ^Duckman33:

LOl keep your heads in the sand guys. Can't wait till we can say "We told you so." I find it laughable that history backs this up and you guys still vehemently deny this is a possible scenario.


I voted for the content of the video being poorly formed, not for the theoretical possibility of violence in the near future. This video talks about the USA's inability to actually fight a WW3, yet, for some reason, its inevitability to start the thing that it can't start. Small wars were we gang up on some third world country is the only past "evidence" of our history. Us starting a full fledged world war we have left Europe, they are good at that sort of thing.

LOl keep your heads in the sand guys. Can't wait till we can say "We told you so." I find it laughable that history backs this up and you guys still vehemently deny this is a possible scenario.

Ah! The theme of racism returns!

Uppity is a word usually associated with certain people.

And so I get to say I TOLD YOU SO -- sexism and racism are similar!

Nanner nanner boo boo.

(Image of me dancing) I am right! I am right!!!


>> ^blankfist:

Okay, you've had your fun being all uppity. But lunch ain't gonna cook itself, and we're hungry.

I was commiserating with spoco earlier about how he had to keep repeating his original point because nobody heard him.

Let me say this again.

I HAVE NO TROUBLE WITH THE CONTENT OF THE C PUNCH VIDEO.

I never had any trouble with the content of the C Punch video.

I do not know how else to say it. Except. I have no trouble with the content of that video.

Go back and read my words, if you doubt me. I never ever had a problem with that video. It is everything anybody has said about it -- a woman buying into stupid frat boy antics and trying to be part of the gang.

I feared that the video would unleash an ugly comment stream -- oh look, it did. Thanks, joedirt. Nice to meet you. And thanks for proving my point. And after it was posted, I had a problem with the title. And still I didn't say much -- I didn't have to, because the great and glorious @spoco2 had something to say.

I wrote this post after the promoting and qualitying of a vid onto the front page with a thumbnail of an anonymous naked woman. A bewb shot. It was the last straw after gritting my teeth with that C Punch TITLE promoted onto the front page the day before.

Enough was enough. I didn't like it.

Let me please direct your attention to the title of this Sift Post.

I am not enjoying the trolling on the Sift.

None of you had to come here. None of you had to comment. I am glad that you all did. Including joedirt (who doesn't love to be proved right? Who doesn't love to say I told you so? Especially a woman!)

And I am honored that apparently choggie showed up. He was gone before I started participating here. Hi Choggie!

Five years I have been coming to this site. Five years I have read all manner of sexist hogwash with barely a peep.

But the last two days... the last two days, something different was up. Something was happening that was qualitatively different. I couldn't remain silent anymore.

I really appreciate the PMs I have gotten. I really appreciate everyone who spoke up here today, especially @krelokk, who doesn't normally post. And @blankfist, you lovely man, I see you behind the trolling.

I am just rambling now. Sorry. I have spent way too much time on this today.

I love the Sift.

>> ^blankfist:

. Of all the things to get ireful about, a woman voluntarily exercising her sameness with men isn't one.