From: starbugaboo@NOSPAMyahoo.com   
      
   Spleeph wrote:   
   >   
   > "Col"  laid this on us:   
   >   
   > >   
   > >"garth2k5"  wrote in message   
   > >news:1188776429.155194.227550@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...   
   > >   
   > >>   
   > >> Garth - tired. and now 32.   
   > >   
   > >32?   
   > >   
   > >You try being 40 mate!   
   > >   
   > >Col   
   > >   
   > I tried 40.  I didn't like it much.  I've been trying 44 for some time   
   > now. It's not much better than 40.  I'll give 44 a few more months and   
   > if it doesn't improve I'll kick it in the head and try 45.   
   >   
   > I wish I could try 20 again, but I seemed to have misplaced it.  Where   
   > do the years go?   
      
   I've been trying 40 for a bit now and I'm not impressed. 42 will be nice   
   just due to it being the answer to life, the universe and everything.   
   Though that said, it's bound to be a let-down after that sort of   
   expectation is built up.   
      
   I'm not sure I'd want to try 20 again but 28 was good... old enough to   
   be taken seriously professionally and yet the body hadn't turned on me   
   yet. Why are knees so fragile?!   
      
   --   
   Starbugaboo   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)