robinheid

sigh... please point out to me where exactly I say I "have a problem with (homosexual) marriage." you seem to be afflicted with the same hallucinatory interpretations of certain statements as your sister Jeanne, who insisted that I was anti-abortion even when i repeatedly affirmed my support therefore - just not in the way she was accustomed to hearing. so have at it, trophy boy; show me where I say what you claim I say... or apologize for mistating my words so you could climb on your soapbox. SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Thanks, Andi, I appreciate your comments. And I can see where you might think me rude or condescending, though I prefer to consider it just stating the facts unvarnished... :) Google "FLDS raid in Texas" for details but basically some sick chick in colorado made a crank call saying young girls were being married and sexually abused blah blah so Texas cops raided the place in armored personnel carriers with body armor and automatic weapons and seized scores of kids, most of whoom were less then ten years old (of both sexes), and then lied about the number of underage mothers and brides - 99 percent of whom turned out to be over 18. They split the families and traumatized the children and if even one child of a homosexual couple had been seized by social services like this it would have created a national outcry. But this unbelieveable assault on not only the first amendment but the 4th and 5th (unlawful search/due process) went by with not one of the liberty watchdogs anywhere on the political spectrum saying even one word about it - and then billvon whines about yard signs... that is why i am abrupt and impatient about it; willful blindness of people to the real threats to liberty in favor of whining about peripheral bad manners. Same same with the "war on drugs," which basically lies at the root of all this stuff; as soon as you legally dictate what people can and cannot put in their bodies, then you set a precedent for legally dictating to them what they can do with their own bodies, what they can have in their pockets, cars and homes, what they can (fill in the blank)... But that's another thread. Suffice it to say that my personal view on almost every"rights-based" political issue was summed up nicely more than 200 years ago by Thomas Paine: "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." RH SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

sigh... please point out to me where exactly I say I am "in favor of taking away (homosexual) marriage rights." you seem to be afflicted with the same hallucinatory interpretations of certain statements as your sister Jeanne, who insisted that I was anti-abortion even when i repeatedly affirmed my support therefore - just not in the way she was accustomed to hearing. And "we" are not "all saying the same thing." Pro-homosexual marriage people yap constantly abour their "rights" and the discrimination that should be abolished, but never yet have i heard any of them say anything in support of _other_ forms of non-traditional marriage except when their feet are held to the rhetorical fire as i did earlier in this thread. so have at it, girlfriend. Now show me where I say what you claim I say... or apologize for mistating my words so you could climb on your soapbox. and now i really _am_ outta here for the game. nice chatting with all of you... -rh SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

first point: ahhh, the "children at risk" argument yet again. besides that, I never heard of the case you reference, an excuse i doubt you can make about the FLDS case. second point: this is not just a CA issue now, is it? I have long noticed how all you homosexual marriage yappers never open your yap in support of _other_ types of non-traditional marriage that are prohibited. Could it be your own bigotry against polygamists, who other than their plural marriages are generally conservative politically and religiously? I'm not just picking on leftys only here, either... I remain concerned and astonished at the deafening silence from not only you and the ACLU but every other homosexual marriage advocate and First Amendment defender and separation-of-church-and-state yapper about the horror show that happened in texas. There were multiple outrageous violations of the Constitution and none of the alleged watchdogs of liberty rose any alarm whatsoever. so i'm not picking on you guys so much as just tagging along on your Prop 8 discussion to make a point. And now i'm outta here; the Broncos game is on. Really, though, you oughta be a little more consistent and a little less polemical every time someone exposes a hole in your hipness. it would be politically smarter, for one thing. love and kisses, rh SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

So we have a polygaphobe, and an uniformed one at that. As my good friend Mr. Quade pointed out, the whole FLDS thing was a nasty hoax perpetrated by a sick individual in Colorado and covered up by Texas with desperate lies such as the one to which you fell victim. (Bottom line: All of the "underage" brides turned out to be adults.) None of this matters to polygaphobes, however, who like homophobes immediately use the "children at risk" argument to defend their bigotry. SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

if you have explicitly stated your support for polygamy as well as homosexual marriage, then I apologize for lumping you in there with the rest of the yappers who defend one but not the other. But does your record actually show such an explicit statement of support for polygamy that is equal to your stated support for homosexual marriage? And have you made any explicit denunciations of the FLDS rape by Texas social services equal to your explicit denunciations of those who oppose homosexual marriage? Just wondering... SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

then why didn't you speak up when they were raped by the texas dept of social services? why are you yapping about homosexual marriage but not polygamy? Same same, right? SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Yes, religious zealots such as the FLDS polygamists who were raped by the Texas social services department because they choose to love each other a little differently than one-man-one-woman marriage rules so dictate. Funny, though, how all the no-on-8ers flap their jaws incessantly about the rights of homosexuals to marry but never say word one in defense of polygamy, or even utter a peep in protest over the horrific treatment accorded not only to the FLDS adults but to their children as well. Any of you yappers care to shed a little light on that - ahem - oversight for me? SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

good catch, jakee... and you reinforce my point. bill didn't even notice. that's why i said he oughta brush up on his logic and grammar skills before he takes me on again. Just for your information, however, it was not a despicable partisan lie; it was a little rhetorical landmine he stepped on and you didn't. congrats. BTW, do you want the Cartoon Messiah to be president - or do you prefer the old white guy? robin heid SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

just joking, bill. you're a pretty bright guy actually, even if i don't always share your perspectives and conclusions. -robin SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

I said: John McCain told self-effacing jokes; the Cartoon Messiah didn't. That means the Cartoon Messiah did _not_ tell jokes. Maybe I should have left off the adjective so you could understand the sentence better. As for your second contention ("now you're saying they're not (jokes)"), you are similarly out to logical and grammatical lunch: I said no such thing. I did not address the source material; I just answered _your question_ about whether or not I preferred to have Joe the Plumber making war decisions. Really, billy boy, maybe you should brush up on Logic 101 and basic English grammar before you try debating me. That way it might sorta be a contest. robin heid SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

You fell very neatly into the (mouse)trap there, billy boy... as I knew you would. Let me explain the difference for you: John McCain told self-effacing jokes that were actually funny; the Cartoon Messiah didn't. Yes, I would much prefer Joe the Plumber making war decisions than the Cartoon Messiah. And yes, I'd much rather vote for a man who thinks Mickey Mouse is a big republican rat than a Cartoon Messiah who thinks he himself is a comic book hero from outer space here to save the world. robin heid SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Dan, Thanks for your note. I didn't take it as a personal attack, certainly not compared to the multitude of nasty things said about me in this thread that went unwarned and unsanctioned. You have to read higher in the thread to get the context, though. You see, I was being personally attacked by several lefty posters for using the Messiah's actual name - Barack Hussein Obama - so I said I'd call him the Messiah because that didn't seem to offend them. And sure enough, it didn't - didn't hear a peep from any of them as soon as I started calling him the Messiah. Of course, after the Al Smith dinner the other night, that name is now outdated: "I was not born in a manger," said He Whose Name Cannot Be Used. "I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father, Jor-el, to save the Planet Earth." Oh joy! Let's put in control of the world's most powerful country and its thousands of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons... a community organizer who thinks he's a comic book character from outer space here to save the world. robin heid P.S. Definition from www.freedictionary.com: meg·a·lo·ma·ni·a n. 1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence. 2. An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions. Noun 1. megalomaniac - a pathological egotist SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Dear "jraf," The nonsense you spouted in your personal attack on me is rivaled only by that listed in your personal profile. Yes, I am in fact a lot older than you and I have learned this much in those extra years: Try not to shoot off your mouth on subjects about which you know nothing. And it is clear that you know nothing about the Messiah or the rest of the socialists hiding behind the name "Democrat." Read Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto and you will find that key elements of the Democratic platform have plagiarized that manifesto. Then you can read the Messiah's own books and learn that the primary influences in his intellectual life are Marxist. And lest you think that statement is open to interpretation, keep in mind that these are the Messiah's own words - at least those not ghost-written for him by Bill Ayers, whose idea of "educational reform" is to turn our children into instruments of the socialist revolution. Details at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122411943821339043.html?mod=googlenews_wsj But that's another thread. Check out this page on snopes.com: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ownwords.asp It speaks to an email going around that uses excerpts from the Messiah's books to paint him as a socialist. The intriguing thing about this snopes.com entry is that, yes, a couple of the email passages are misstated, but the clarifications -- using the Messiah's own words -- are even more clearly socialist than either the accurate or inaccurate email passages alone. And then, of course, there is Joe the Plumber, who got the Messiah to blow his own cover by saying he wants to spread the wealth around. That is what socialism is, Mr. "jraf:" From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs. the Messiah _said_ this when he said spreading the wealth around is a good thing: That as soon as you start getting ahead, he will take your money and hold you back so that those not as blessed in ability or good fortune can catch up. There is a famous quote by Phelps Adams that sums this up nicely: "Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: No man should have so much. The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: All men should have as much." Given the Messiah's _own words_ to Joe the plumber, into which group does he fall? And after you answer that, ask yourself: "Is that what I really want for my children?" robin heid SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Hey Jeanne, I'm not quite sure what to make of your "comments" that I have no right to tell a woman what to do with her body, blah blah blah.... and that, further, I support the notion that no exceptions should be made, bleah, bleah, bleah... For whatever reason, you seem to willfully ignore or misunderstand what I think is my clearly stated position: * that I strongly support public policy that keeps abortion legal for those women who choose it; but * at the same time support making sure that this choice is an _informed_ choice, as in: you are committing homicide when you kill a fetus because that fetus is, in fact, human, so be very sure that your heart and soul are clear about that fact if you decide to pull the trigger for "choice." It is, in fact, extremely well documented that significant numbers of women who have abortions have psychological and emotional problems related thereto because they did not, in fact, make an informed choice. I know a number of them personally and that uninformed "choice" that they made continues to eat at their hearts and souls and show up in their attitudes and words years and even decades after they made that "choice" to kill what they realized too late was, in fact, a human being - their baby. Criminalizing abortion does nothing but amplify and complicate this trauma, and that is why, as I have repeatedly explained in previous posts, and in published essays in multiple forums spanning more than 20 years, abortion must always be legal: Public policy must be geared toward minimizing, reducing and eliminating individual and social harm, not contributing thereto. That is also why I held your feet to the fire of clarity and awareness about what abortion actually _is_ because without that clarity and awareness it is hard to make a "choice" when you don't really know what it is you are choosing. So Jeanne, continue to ignore and/or misunderstand my actual positions if you want, continue with your astonishingly vicious personal attacks based solely upon that ignorance and/or misunderstanding if you want, but none of that changes the fact that we both agree abortion should remain legal. robin heid SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Serial killers and jeffrey dahmer types are also the rarest of the rare among murderers, but let's grant your point... "Partial birth" homicide aside," the average pre-natal homicide takes place after there are arms and legs and heads and beating hearts - all of which get sucked out of your body with a vacuum cleaner. This is not rare but _standard_ procedure - 40 million and counting since 1973. That is, in fact, what an abortion is - homicide by dismemberment of a human being. We call al qaeda terrorists beasts for chopping off the heads of living human beings, but for some reason sucking the head off of a fetus is just a "procedure" and a "choice." You can't win on this one, dear Jeanne. I brought up "partial birth" homcide and leaving living babies to die after they survived an abortion just to see how far you take this "choice-without-considering-reality" thing, and how far you support the Messiah - whose lefty cohorts even run from him on the latter. As to when life begins, in terms of the legal justification for abortion i present in my essay, conception is the simplest marker. This of course is anathema to most pro-abortion rights types because they are terrified that if they grant humanity to a fetus (even if they are "partially born"), then their rights to abortion will be taken away. My premise eliminates this concern; it grants humanity to fetuses (as we have over the centuries granted humanity to blacks, chinese, the irish, and women), but at the same time puts fetuses under the jurisdiction of long-codified and observed common law with regard to self defense. As for your final "finding," I personally oppose the death penalty as administered by the state; i think that if the death penalty is put at the point of attack, there will be fewer attacks and fewer deaths, but if you give the state even one "reason" to kill its own citizens, it will soon find other "reasons." As a veteran of the 82d Airborne and a scholar of military theory, policy and application, particularly in the area of counterterrorism and special operations, I find that most times in history the countries that are too quick to pull triggers end up get taken out by their own blowback. I also find that most militarist assholes do not wear military uniforms; they wear pinstripe suits... like the Messiah, for example. He wants to put more troops into afghanistan and make that war bigger and attack pakistan -- a muslim country with nuclear weapons and 120 million people -- just becaise we _might_ be able to take out one bad guy. _Real_ smart use of american power. Utterly brilliant. But back atcha for a moment on your "finding;" I have one too. Why is it that so many anti-war and anti-death-on-almost-all-other-issues types don't seem to mind that through pre-natal homicide we have killed more than 40 MILLION innocent human beings since 1973? robin SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Dearest Jeanne, I said nothing in my PMs to you that I haven't restated here, so the readers of this thread can judge for themselves if what I sent you was "disgusting.". That you find reality "disgusting" simply reinforces my point: It's kinda hard to make an informed "choice" about anything if you are not willing to face the reality attendant to those choices. You simply dismiss as "disgusting" anything that might make you face up to the fact that: * abortioin is homicide, * partial birth abortion in particular, and * letting living babies die unhelped because they were supposed to die during the abortion is part and parcel of what you get when you choose the Messiah as your new leader... and his delightful wife who calls stabbing living babies in their skulls a "procedure" (I have the fundraising letter she sent out for anyone who'd like to see it). That's the bottom line here, dear Jeanne. It seems as if you are afraid to face reality because, kind soul that you probably are in most any other way, it rocks your world to even contemplate the notion that fetuses are human. BUt that's like jumping out the door thinking you can never die on a skydive. Nice warm fuzzy fiction, but not exactly in tune with the world as it truly is. Really, though, you ought to send me an email or unblock your PM. I really would like you to see what provoked an enormous amount of thought among all the pro-choice women who were the editors who... chose to publish it. best regards, robin SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Shame on me? Quite a statement from someone who apparently doesn't even understand the meaning of the word. But I forgive you too. It must be really tough being so morally superior to everyone around you. Gosh, what a cross to bear... OOOOPS... I did it again. ha ha ha... have a beer or two, dude. you're wrapped way too tight... SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Dearest Jean and darling Andy, You're right, of course. I shouldn't call the junior senator from Illinois by _any_ of his allegedly given names. Two of them are arabic/islamic and one is african, so of _course_ anyone who uses any of them is obviously a bigot and a racist. (Hear that, Michelle and Joe? You better quit calling him by his name or his acolytes will call you racist - virulently racist at that.) So from now on, I'lll just call him the Messiah, as that term seems to pass your political correctness test. And finally, for the other readers of this thread, please note that dear Jeanne still refuses to address the questions I posed to her about "partial birth" infanticide and survivable abortions. As i say in my essay, we are never going to come together on abortion until pro-abortionists discard their horrifying notion that fetuses are not human - and anti-abortionists discard their equally horrifying notion that women are just baby factories. That is the premise and purpose behind the thesis that the right of self defense supersedes the right to life: it has been codified in common and general law that if someone enters our homes uninvited, we may "presume deadly intent" and defend ourselves accordingly - if we so choose, and even if the person who entered our homes was completely innocent of any deadly or evil intent. It is in fact very important that abortion never be made illegal because, as we see with drug and sex-for-sale prohibitions, the cure is much worse than the disease. At the same time, it needs to be made profoundly clear that abortion is killing a human being. Even Planned Parenthood acknowledged this in its own lliterature up to the 1960s. As with post-partum abortion in self-defense, if the person doing the killing does not think it out ahead of time and get real clear on whether they really do or do not want to take a human life (pre-natal or post-partum), if they do in fact take a life without getting clear in their mind and souls _first_, then they will be tortured by it the rest of their llives. We know this happens with some people who kill a 15-year-old to protect their property, and we know this happens to women who kill their babies without first being clear that they are infact killing their babies. "Choice" cannot be intelligently made without being in touch with reality, and understanding just what exactly the choices are. That is why it is so difficult for so many pro-abortion rights types to face that fact that partial birth abortion is, in fact, stabbing a living baby in the skull and sucking its brains out. That is, in fact, why so many pro-abortion rights people refuse to consider whether a fetus is human - they just want to have the "choice" if necessary. Fine. I support the choice. But as the chinese proverb says, the beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names and the right name for abortion is homicide. Justifiable homicide in the eyes of some, not justifiable in the eyes of others - just like post-partum killing in self-defense or war. There are those who absolutely refuse to take a human life even in defense of their own. I am not one of them, but I respect those who so believe (as long as they do not impugn on _my_ right to choose self defense). Now maybe, dear Jeanne, you can quit hyperventilating for a moment here and carefully read what I wrote and rationally respond to it rather than blurting out your usual tedious screeds. love and kisses, robin SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Presume is sister to "assume" and you know what they say about that: Assume makes an ass of u and me. I assume nothing, but i find it curious that merely stating someone's name incurs such a conclusion. methinks thou dost protesteth way too much... I guess i should just call him barack - except... OOOOPS... that's the name of the horse muhammed rode to jerusalem when he walked up the ladder to talk to god. so correct me if I'm wrong, please, but according to your "logic," that apparently means that when his wife calls him barack she's being a virulent racist and bigot, right? I mean, isn't that what you just said? And why is it, darling Andy, that you have not raised thy voice in righteous indignation to all the multiple bigotries hurled at and heaped upon Sarah Heath Palin? Sorry, dude, but your illogic is showing through. You must be kin to dear Jeanne. love and kisses, robin SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

My dearest Jeanne, I forgive your utter lack of comprehension when it comes to my abortion views because you are singularly incapable of thinking rationally. For the rest of you reading this thread, I asked dear Jeanne in a PM if she did or did not support Hussein Obama's position that it is OK to stab a half-born baby in the skull with scissors and then suck its brains out - and if she agreed with Hussein Obama that it is OK to force doctors to let a baby who survived an abortion die in the sink instead of rendering aid and assistance. Dear Jeanne responded with vitiriol and endless prattering about my right-wing zealotry and what she concluded, without facts, was my "anti" position on abortion. Unfortunately, when I sent her an essay I'd written a decade ago in defense of abortion called "The right of self defense supersedes the right to life," she was unable to read it because, Hussein Obamaite that she is, she blocked further receipt of PMs by me. That essay, by the way, was printed in Colorado's oldest political journal, The Statesman, and also in the Denver Women's News. It is a little long to post here, and a bit off-topic to this thread, so if anyone is curious about how I tie abortion rights and the right of self-defense together, please PM me and I will send you a copy. And dear Jeanne, you would have saved yourself some embarrassment here had you not blocked my PMs. You might also ponder the old Indian saying that Great Spirit gives us two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we talk. Which also explains why you think I have but one issue with Hussein Obama. You don't actually care to hear what I think; you are too busy shooting your mouth off telling me what _you_ think I think. And for the record, my principal issue with Hussein Obama is that he is a totalitarian collectivist, and the "change" he will bring can best be summed up through Orwell's observation that the future of mankind is a boot stomping on a human face forever. It's there in black and white for anyone with the research skills and intellectual honesty to check it out - which was the reason for my initial post: every experientially-based insult hurled at Governor Palin applies in spades to Hussein Obama. He is far less qualified to govern than she is. In fact, he has never governed anything, whereas she has been a mayor and currently is governor of a state bigger than Iran and all but 16 other countries in the world, which also supplies 20 percent of America's energy. Compared to what? A "community organizer" who's never had a real job in his life, voted "present" way more than anyone in the history of the illinois legislature and then missed almost half of the Senate votes there have been since he was elected there. She's a front-line gal; he's a back-row guy. Simple as that. robin SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Just remember everybody: Whatever naysaying you offer about Sarah Palin applies in spades to barack hussein obama. He mouths the platitudes of his lefty handlers. He has no original thoughts. He has never had a private-sector job, much less a job with executive experience. He is the king (or should i say messiah?) of the um-duh-err-uhh non-teleprompter soundbite. Had the obamanation been subjected to one-tenth the scrutiny faced by Sarah Palin, he would never have made it past Iowa. So keep that in mind: Every experientially-related insult you hurl at the Alaska governor applies in spades to the exalted junior senator from illinois. I'm far closer to Ron Paul than any of these Beltway yayhoos, but please, obama acolytes, get a grip on reality.... your grand exalted messiah has much less experience, knowledge, and real-life common sense than the woman you so gleefully disparage. but then sexist undertones have been part of hussein's schtick for several months now - not surprising that his acolytes sing the same tune. robin heid 1990 Libertarian gubernatorial candidate for Colorado SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Hi there, Robin Heid here. I'm on a healing hiatus at the moment, but I started in 1979 when I was 25 and made my most recent one in 2004 when I was 50, and I plan to resume when I'm healed up from my crash at the royal gorge in 0ct 2004. 1979-2004 I think there was one year when I didn't make at least one. Raider Ramstad is jumping too. he's a 747 pilot with 4000 skydives and about 50 base jumps and he took up base just a couple of years ago. He's in his early 50s. You're largely right, though: most base jumpers are in their 20s and 30s, just like the swoopers and the hard-core RW guys. robin base 44 SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."