On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 13:42:55 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Apr 2003 20:43:45 GMT, in rec.gardens.roses you wrote:

On 6 Apr 2003 14:51:55 GMT, (lms) wrote:

I've seen some talk about this rose. Lest you ever put any other red gd
rose on a pedestal...
you'd best think again about that pedestal.
I've also heard talk of eating roses, you know, around here? Eat this one.
heheh

http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~mstephen/8x6mrl03.jpg

That is not remotely pretty. You need to learn that bigger is not
always better.

P. S. Bite me, chicken man.


m

http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~mstephen/ros99.htm

Speaking of Mr. Lincoln, I was at Lowe's today, picking out a new
hanging pendant for my kitchen to replace the old "granny fixture"
and, what should be by the door but some nice gallon $8.97 roses. And,
lo and behold, one of them was a very nice Mr. Lincoln with two good
sized half-opened buds on it. Because I'm jonesing for some blooms,
I'm going to forgo my own advice and not disbud this plant and just
hope for the best.


For strongly-scented (citrusy) blooms with long straight stems and
the most perfect long buds ever, this is a great rose. Otherwise it is
fatally flawed. The bush shape sucks, for one thing. Look at CM's
Biggus Diccus New Mexico example again, and you can see it. It is a
giant version of what EVERYBODY'S Mr. L. looks like. Shooting canes
straight to the stars, totally naked knees. This one just has 20-foot
legs. Ugly, ugly ubly. Then there is the fact that the bloom form is
loose and icky, with a sunken center, and it blues so terribly it is
only really true red for about 15 minutes. And, NO, cutting early does
not help. They blue in the house to a sicky purply-magenta. Then there
is the fact that you get enough of these roses together and they get
that faint garbagy smell that all grocery stores used to have. Grow it
if you must--but there are better reds.