Skip to main content

Smoking

His baton was a Malboro Red.......He'd hold an unlit cigarette an exceedingly long time, until it became fixed in the minds of his audience like a handgun. Then he'd make a grand production of striking a match and bring the flame to the cigarette tip. The next rounded phrase that fell from his mouth would be encased within a dollop of smoke. Then, when he flicked his ash---tap, tap--- everyone leaned forward and watched closely, as if Willie Mays were tapping his bat on the home plate. Something interesting was about to happen. At last, he dropped the burned match into the glass ashtray with a light plink, he delivered the punchline or came to the crucial point, and I was tempted to yell, "Bravo!"

J.R.Moehringer

Comments

Leg-iron said…
In these enlightened times, of course, all you need do is place your lighter on the table and wave the cigarette around as you speak.

You don't need to light it to get an effect, although nowadays the effect is not comedy, but terror.

It's still fun.

Popular posts from this blog

I HATE OXFAM

Walking through town today , I have been accosted by several of OXFAM's offensive young CHUGGERS OXFAM: A society formed by left-wing middle-class twats to assuage their feelings of guilt as they swig their Mouton-Cadet

piano miniature no 3

From the Reference Guide to Epidemiology of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, the principal reference for instructing US courts in regard to epidemiology. The Manual states: “…epidemiology cannot objectively prove causation; rather, causation is a judgment for epidemiologists and others interpreting the epidemiological data.” [6], and “.. the existence of some [associated] factors does not ensure that a causal relationship exists. Drawing causal inferences after finding an association and considering these factors requires judgment and searching analysis.” [7] and “ [w]hile the drawing of causal inferences is informed by scientific expertise, it is not a determination that is made by using scientific methodology .”. Thus, while epidemiologists insist that their discipline is a science, clearly it is not the solid experimental science that produces reliable causal connections to fuel new scientific discoveries, successful technological advances, and