God, you're a dumbass

So there's this Chicago-based comedian named Ian Coburn, and I guess he has a book out. I've seen ads for it on the bus - or, more accurately, one ad several times. The advertising budget must not have been that big, since the entire ad consists of two pictures (one of a woman and one of the book), plus mostly black text on a red background. I suspect the whole thing was put together in Print Shop. (No, that's mean... Print Shop Pro.)

One of the lines in the ad is a blurb that reads as follows: "'Best book I've read' -- Amazon Review". Now, if you're stupid, you might think, "Oh! Wow, the staff reviewer thought it was the best book they'd read! Hell of a book, I guess!" If you are like me and have several functioning brain cells, you are probably not Ian Coburn's target audience, because you immediately thought, "Uh, did he just quote, in the ad for his book, the opinion of some random guy in the Amazon user reviews section?"

Yes. Yes he did. But it gets better. So, "Best book I've read" is the title of the review. Here is how the review opens:

I'm 1/3 the way into this book, and am very impressed. It is so packed with knowledge. I felt like I have so much more foresight even after reading just the first 10 pages.

Wow! Best book ever, right? I mean, jeez, first I read 10 pages, then 90 - I was like, this is the best book I've ever read! No need to even finish it - this is going up on Amazon right f'ing now!

Are you kidding me? That's the best endorsement you could find? I guess he was too scared to go with one that was an obvious plant:

This book has been #1 in humor on Amazon in Canada a bunch of times, #8 in Europe and as high as #3 in the U.S., where it was written. It is even being translated into Russian and other foreign publishers are considering translating it, too. These are huge accolades for any book but especially for one by a first-time, unknown author. They are testaments to its exceptional quality. I am a big fan and follower of its success. I think its accolades and the other reviews here speak more for it than anything I could write and agree that it is indeed to books what independent film is to movies. Just like independent films, the book is not one-dimensional; rather, it works as a book about being a comedian, a book about one guy's growth, a book of funny stories, and/or a book about dating. It manages to do it all.

I know when I'm a big fan of a book, I track its sales in various countries and somehow gain knowledge of what publishers in foreign countries are considering doing with it. What the fuck?

Also, this seems a little... I don't know, suspicious:

Publisher and agent comments about God is a Woman:

"Too big for us; funny." -- Capital Books
"Hilarious . . . can't wait for it to come out." -- Basic Books

"Too big for us?" Isn't that really a nice way of shooting someone down? "Oh, gosh, Ian, we'd love to publish your book, but, uh... it's too big for us. Yeah, yeah, we just couldn't handle all that popularity and money it's surely going to generate." Ditto the second one, like "We have decided not to publish your book at this time, but best wishes; we can't wait for it to come out." Just a formality. I mean, are publishers really in the habit of giving quotes to books that are going to come out from other publishers? There's no way these quotes weren't pulled from nicely-worded rejection letters, right?

In other stupid writer news, move over Scoop Jackson! We have a new title holder for the Worst Sports Column Ever Written. And it's... Chicago's own Mike Downey! Take it away, Mike:

Gossage is the 61st pitcher to gain induction. He won 124 games. Clemens very well could be barred from the Hall because of performance-enhancing drug use that has not been proven. He has won 354 games.

Goose is an immortal but the Rocket is not?

...my head hurts. Ken Tremendous over at FJM already tore this article a new asshole - as well he should have - but I just wanted to add that I have little doubt it is the dumbest article ever written about sports. Possibly about anything. I have a hard time believe that this guy knows anything about baseball, since he doesn't even seem to know that Goose Gossage was a motherfucking relief pitcher. Also, aren't we jumping to conclusions just slightly on Clemens? He won't appear on the ballot until 2012 at the earliest (for a 2013 induction), giving him plenty of time to either clear his name or have his drug use proven. And frankly, I suspect Clemens will get in either way. Also also, if you read it, he apparently thinks that the only criterion on which a hitter should be judged for entry is hits. Except he seems to contradict himself later in the piece. Really, I have no idea what this article is trying to say about anything, except that it's screaming one thing loud and clear: "I know nothing about baseball, and if I have a BBWAA vote, no wonder Bert Blyleven still isn't in." I'm not sure what's more amazing - that a guy who's paid to write about sports wrote something this dumb, or that an editor read it and didn't fire him on the spot.