I got some things done in the garden yesterday though, of course, not all of what I wanted to do. I got distracted by cultivating and fertilizing some of the beds. I can get to most parts of the gardens easily now that the hibiscus is moved. I can actually see most of the table now. Since I put four of the strawberries on the fence I had space at the foot of the patio chairs (which we have never used for their designed purpose) I moved a couple of the large herbs to replace them. I still have about half of the containers to cultivate and feed today. And some more trimming. I have a dehydrator full of chocolate mint to grind today. I could have filled another two the same size but the remainder went into the compost.
I watched Obama's press conference (or at least part of it.) I was struck by a lovely Catch-22. Obama tried to give some lip service to the notion that citizens have a right to know what their government is doing and publicly call attention to its transgressions while defending, lukewarmly, the spying programs that have become so technical and pervasive. On the one hand, he says he wants more "transparency" but doesn't indicate how to have that and a covert spying program which is by its nature secret. Can anyone tell me how those two notions can co-exist? It is beyond my limited brain. And if both are desirable good where do you draw the line between them? Right now the line is so fuzzy who can tell when it has been crossed.
Why does this sound so damned familiar? Oh, yeah!! We hear this over here. Often.
I think I'll stick to beer. This is a waste of perfectly good sugar and yeast.