hoov, alternatively you could move the red rose, which may get a bit crowded as it grows more. I think the daylilies are far enough from the climber to not grate. The hydrangea (?) by the way, is simply gorgeous. Carol, GT with lavender planted around him is an inspired scheme. I do like complimentary color schemes very much. They're exciting and yet not "in your face". My bete noire is bright roses that are next to each other on the color wheel, such as red and orange, being grown together, especially with no cool-colored companion plants to separate them. As you said, it's been fun to hear different opinions. In the past there have been strident voices on this forum that seemed to enjoy turning everything into a confrontation, but thankfully they've moved on, and we now seem blessed with many interesting and articulate members (such as you!) who enjoy discussing everything to do with roses and gardening without desiring to create conflict. It's been very enjoyable here lately. Ingrid

Carla, if it were just a prank phone call? Of course, I'd have dropped it completely. Yes, the words were childish, BUT the person had my unlisted number, my name, and either called from, or was able to electronically make the call LOOK as if it came from my funeral director. It's a complicated, bizarre combination of facts, so yes, the police got involved because it's NOT a simple prank, random call. It's quite obviously someone who went to a great deal of trouble to make this frightening call. And we couldn't run the risk that whoever went to this trouble might do something worse in future, so yes, it needed to be reported. Yes, my number is out there--but not many places. I'm pretty careful about who I give it too and I don't work, don't belong to a church or other organization. My daughter is grown, so it's not floating around a school. The contests I enter aren't local, so unlikely anyone around here would have gotten my number that way. It's totally understandable that the funeral director would change the locks and phone #. EITHER someone had a key to the relative's apt (which is owned by the funeral home) and her future safety could be at risk, OR someone electronically fudged the caller ID once--and could do so again, to other people, putting her at legal risk of being charged with harrassing phone calls. She's a teacher, she can't afford to have any kind of criminal conviction on her record. How much worse would it be if she were charged and convicted of something she didn't even do? As far who I may have had a 'strong' conversation with? I hadn't yet spoken to the funeral home about Aunt's burial (was actually planning on calling today, as a matter of fact). The hospice workers are ALL angels, and every time I speak with them, I thank them profusely, and tell them how appreciative we all are of the work they do--there have been no problems or criticisms there. Same with the employees of the assisted living facility where Aunt lives--I appreciate all of them and let them know frequently. There's absolutely no one in my life right now, who might have a beef with me, that I can think of. My husband and I are the kind of people who are always helping someone, who have the honorary position of being the neighborhood 'grandparents', are well thought of by our neighbors and friends. The ONLY people we've ever had any kind of problem with are DH's family--the ones who were stealing MIL's money, who we had to take to court and stop legally. They are just the sort to do something like this, BUT we've had no contact with them in years, and I can't quite figure that they'd have ALL the info, as well as access to this particular phone. Honestly? I'd love to blame them, but I just can't make all the pieces fit there, either. It's quite a puzzle, and so much more complicated than the run of the mill prank call.

tTanks for the input, I did not know there were trailing Vincas...sounds beautiful, On the other note, the only way my pics show up are in ideabooks and I don't put them there, hmmmm ?

As is your usual method, someone has disagreed with you and you defend yourself by springing to attack. Even when you don't understand the point the person is trying to make, you see some one who appears to be disagreeing with you, and you attack. Even when the poster is mostly agreeing with you, but is quibbling about some interpretation, you attack. I don't need a lengthy lecture about economic theory or the actual business practices of major corporations. I will freely stipulate that you know more about those subjects than anyone, anywhere. But as with the other times when you've attacked me, that is not relevant to the point I'm trying to make. To break my point down in easy to digest declarative statements First the assumptions: Self-checkout machines lower the labor costs of a grocery store in because fewer cashiers are needed to service the same number of customers. Just because the company does so and has lower labor costs, that doesn't mean they will instantly and automatically lower all prices by some factor. Instead they will lower some prices, raise some prices, keep some prices the same just as they do virtually every single day. Are you with me so far? If you as a customer buy 20 items and go through self-checkout, and then immediately reenter the store and buy the exact same 20 items and go through the normal checkout lane and then compare the receipts there will be no difference and therefore no evidence to you as the consumer that the company is offering lower prices because of the self-checkout lanes. If you as a customer buy 20 items at a store that hasn't yet installed self checkout lanes, and save the receipt. And then two weeks later, after that very store has installed self-checkout lanes, you go back and repurchase the exact same 20 items, and then compare the receipts. The second one will be either higher, or lower, or exactly the same. Even if it is lower, there is no evidence to the customer that the prices are lower because the store installed self-checkout lanes. Therefore there is no direct evidence to the customer that because the store has installed self-checkout lanes that it is using the lower labor costs to offer lower prices. QED