Mary Rose and Rouge Royal were on my original wish list -They have been in their garden, doing very well. MR has been blossoming nonstop since first week in May when I got her, RR took a very brief week off and is loaded with buds again. Love them both. The new arrivals are slated for giant pots this summer, and if I can figure out where to put it, they will be the first residents of a yellow/purple/white bed. I have a purple day lily, Blueberry Breakfast, that I will move in, and perhaps Boltonia at the back.....

Kay. I didn't do nothing in the beds today.I could barely stand up,and move just a little, so I stayed in the recliner almost the entire day.Everytime I moved a little,I was hurting everywhere, but, then about 5 this evening,I decided to go out and just look at the daylilies to see if just possibleI would see a scape making up, but, nope, no such thing, yet, but, I pulled my litthe garden scooter out on the sidewalk and sat on it and pulled weeds out of some of the pots,and jerked dead, brown leaves off them, to make them look better.I should have thought and brought my osmocote out and put a little in each pot, but, never thought about it, till just about 15 minutes ago.only thing I seen new was about a dozen lily bulbs had sprouted and popped up.I even found one where I know I didn't plant one there.My entire body just seemed to be in spasms today, but, mostly in my back.Tomorrow is suppose to be bad storms with a possibility of tornado's.I sure hope no tornados. jean

Annie, I am fairly familiar with the case. British law on such things is different than American law, and I won't enter into all that except to say that under the British system, the burden of truth regarding public accusations against another is on the accuser. Like it or not, that is their law. I also am not even going to try and defend the actions of a howmanybillion dollar company, or pretend to know the truth behind the allegations of both sides. However, it was enlightening to me to know that the defendants were members of a fringe environmentalist organization that didn't want to affiliate itself with Greenpeace because it was "too mainstream" (Jeepers!) Also, that the fliers they were distributing made the claims that: McDonald's: * is complicit in Third World starvation; * buys from greedy rulers and elites and practices economic imperialism; * wastes vast quantities of grain and water; * destroys rainforests with poisons and colonial invasions; * sells unhealthy, addictive junk food; * alters its food with artificial chemistry; * exploits children with its advertising; * is responsible for torture and murder of animals; * poisons customers with contaminated meat; * exploits its workers and bans unions; * destroys rainforests; * hides its malfeasance.* Now. Did McDonalds overreact? React too harshly? Was McDonalds mean? I don't know. But here we are, 20 years after the fact, hearing from people who were influenced against the company by the case to the point of boycotting their products. I've never owned or had any significant financial interest in a company as big as McDonalds. But if I found out that someone here in town was distributing fliers that accused me of committing horrendous and possibly criminal practices in the course of my daily business, I would fight it. That someone not particularly educated in either law or experienced in any field related to the case made a film, apparently portraying the defendants as puny, helpless victims bullied by an Evil Mega Corp does not impress me. Biased, slanted "documentaries" are produced every day. As for being partially correct in the allegations, I suppose I could be accused of some of those things with equal accuracy. I could well be accused of being, "complicit in Third World starvation" because I eat beef on a regular basis...if I ate lentils instead, I could feed any number of starving people by sending them the money I would save. I expect that I buy from what some would consider "greedy rulers and elites" as well. I would have no defense to the charge that I waste grain and water, depending on the accuser's perspective. I water my roses...frivolous things, and shower far more often than absolutely needed. I don't know how poisons, "colonial invasions" and rainforests could be attributed to me, but then, I don't know how they could be attributed to McDonald's either. Are my contributions to church bake sales selling "unhealthy, addictive junk food?" Okay, okay, I'll quit...but you get my point, right? Likely, I'm far too sensitive on these subjects. I get itchy over attacks on "Big Evil Corporate America" because so often, we jump on the band wagon before we look into it, and so very often, the attacks have less to do with actual facts and more to do with the agendas of the attackers. This is funny, really. Here I am, speaking up for a restaurant I don't even frequent! Once every couple of years or so I drive through to grab something because I'm in a huge rush, on a road trip, whatever...and I ALWAYS regret it! The first two bites taste good because I'm hungry and after that I'm increasingly grossed out. Inevitably, I end up throwing out half my food and wonder what the heck I was thinking!

I have my roses six feet apart but when I see so many roses look beautiful that intertwined with one another looks even more beautiful and compliments. I have Maggie and B.R.Cant. I left those 2 alone. Within 8 ft apart. But the rest, I start to put 1 or 2 within 6 feet and then realized what if...time will tell. Yes, temptations to buy more is bad. Limited space is another issue I have. And I know I messed up just matter of time. Unless, I redesign my backyard my chances are slim with limited funds. I rather do interior first maybe in time but I doubt it. Thinking of doing pots which I know nothing about is another research I need to do . Jin