"The shifts of fortune test the reliability of friends."

- Marcus Tullius Cicero

GO TYRION GO!!!! FUCK EVERYONE!!!!!

Congrats to Austria for winning!!! Conchita deserved it! :):):) Queen of Europe!

But seriously did Sweden have to hog points? Some other decent song could have used those!Their song was not that good, it was only okay. Seriously, you should not get anything for the lyric ‘Undo my sad’. (Yes I liked Switzerland’s song, but I found their song was meant in good humour. Unlike Sweden’s which was trying to be serious.)

I have to wait for tonight to see Eurovision. That’s if anything is on YouTube by then. :(

I don’t get Eurovision, how did some countries get automatically into the final? (I’m looking at you Denmark.)

Also, why not Israel??? :( Better than Belarus (even though their performance was good, Israel’s song was better.)

I am going for Norway and Slovenia! (until I can pick something else, my mind changes)

Not surprised Macedonia did not get in, they had a chance, but the performance was not good. :(

Was surprised about Malta, I really thought that they wouldn’t make it.

Not happy about San Marino, song choice is BORING! Could have picked a better one. Pick Israel over San Marino.

I was surprised Iceland got in. Was kind of happy, since the song they have is good.

New taglines for Scotiabank

Scotiabank: If there’s a way of shooting down you’re dreams we’ll do it.

Scotiabank, you’re as rich as we want you to be.

Grand Budapest Hotel

I really wanted to like this movie, but the low brow humour did not appeal to me. It did have it’s moments and had the potential to be a good movie; but why did it feel the need to entertain the lowest common denominator? I felt it was trying to imitate movies from the 1930’s which I love mostly for their mature humour (though there are some that are a bit clunky, but that was the time period and they were just developing certain movie techniques and some just didn’t work). They should have scrapped the modern dialog, it just was terrible and the brief nudity was jarring, because it was off. They should have watched Lubitsch comedies and took a few notes from them, especially from Ben Hetch’s scriptwriting. You can put adult humor and make it not so vulgar and out of place, he defiantly knows how to do it. Maybe I should write down the Lady Godiva riding a bicycle scene from Design for Living.

If you want to watch better comedies that have better humor watch, Trouble in Paradise and Design for Living.

pookerella94:

hetaliafanficpetpeeves:

235.

one pet peeve I have when I read Hetalia fanfics is that if the writer writes about WW1 and/ or WW2, they have the European nations (England mostly) pissed off at America for joining in “late”. To me, that is offensive. They make it as if it was Ameica’s fault for not “helping soon enough” and that he was selfish for not helping “his friends”. But in those eras, America was in isolation, wanted nothing from Europe and didn’t want to be involved in wars.

[ anon ]

I’m going to be really rusty with my WW1 and WW2 knowledge, so please correct me if I say anything wrong! This also had personal opinions (as an Australian, just in case) so here it goes…
America of course was in isolation. It may have seemed like it wanted nothing to do with Europe and didn’t want to be ‘involved’ in the wars. To say that America in no way was involved in the wars prior towards actually joining them is silly.
A lot of it was economic (and for America’s own improvement imo)
America in WW1 up-scaled the amount of loans that the British and French could take. I think you could say that America was still pretty neutral though, but I think sentiment for the Americans is still lingering as it seems that all Europe and other countries were in turmoil and suffered so much and America just waltzes in the end to take all the credit…
But I think what happened in WW1 really highlights the “America coming late” thing.
In WW2 the public didn’t want to join, but the American government was itching to get involved after the string of German victories, but were held back by their neutrality. Here come’s the lend-lease act, where they gave a bucket load of ammunition and weapons to the British. (The British just paid off the loan in 2004)
This is still being involved but not fully. It seems “half-arsed”. I think people say that America came in too late because it WAS helping, was involved, but giving ammunition, weapons and loans can only do so much. Especially if you are scared that your country is going to be invaded and your people are dying. You don’t want dilly-dallying. You want all the support you can get. 
I think a lot of people blames America (rightly or wrongly) as if it didn’t hold back for so long, history would be MUCH different.
… hopefully this makes sense?

pookerella94:

hetaliafanficpetpeeves:

235.

one pet peeve I have when I read Hetalia fanfics is that if the writer writes about WW1 and/ or WW2, they have the European nations (England mostly) pissed off at America for joining in “late”. To me, that is offensive. They make it as if it was Ameica’s fault for not “helping soon enough” and that he was selfish for not helping “his friends”. But in those eras, America was in isolation, wanted nothing from Europe and didn’t want to be involved in wars.

[ anon ]

I’m going to be really rusty with my WW1 and WW2 knowledge, so please correct me if I say anything wrong! This also had personal opinions (as an Australian, just in case) so here it goes…

America of course was in isolation. It may have seemed like it wanted nothing to do with Europe and didn’t want to be ‘involved’ in the wars. To say that America in no way was involved in the wars prior towards actually joining them is silly.

A lot of it was economic (and for America’s own improvement imo)

America in WW1 up-scaled the amount of loans that the British and French could take. I think you could say that America was still pretty neutral though, but I think sentiment for the Americans is still lingering as it seems that all Europe and other countries were in turmoil and suffered so much and America just waltzes in the end to take all the credit…

But I think what happened in WW1 really highlights the “America coming late” thing.

In WW2 the public didn’t want to join, but the American government was itching to get involved after the string of German victories, but were held back by their neutrality. Here come’s the lend-lease act, where they gave a bucket load of ammunition and weapons to the British. (The British just paid off the loan in 2004)

This is still being involved but not fully. It seems “half-arsed”. I think people say that America came in too late because it WAS helping, was involved, but giving ammunition, weapons and loans can only do so much. Especially if you are scared that your country is going to be invaded and your people are dying. You don’t want dilly-dallying. You want all the support you can get. 

I think a lot of people blames America (rightly or wrongly) as if it didn’t hold back for so long, history would be MUCH different.

… hopefully this makes sense?

(Source: kaiapanito)

Disclaimer: I am not an expert of Roman history, but I think I know enough to even get this.

There was NO reign of Julius Caesar. To put it bluntly without adding confusing historical contexts to the time period, he only had a dictatorship and even though that kind of made him sole leader it was NOT equivalent to a reign of a emperor or monarch. Really things in this time period was not as cut and dry as that. It was the fear of Caesar become sole ruler of Rome that lead to his assassination. Seriously, because he was dictator for so long (the average span of a dictatorship is six months and you are supposed to step down) people in the senate thought he wanted to be ruler of Rome (even though he kind of was unofficially). Even Caesar knew how unpopular the thought was to most people he refused to take the crown that Mark Antony offered him and people were glad, because that’s how Romans thought at that time. (Roman thought: King=not good, un-Roman and didn’t we get rid of the monarchy due to an awful King a few hundred years ago?).

So to make things short, no there was no reign of Julius Caesar.

The reason why I made this post is because someone wrote down in a comment about the series Rome and  how it depicted the time during the reign of Julius Caesar and Augustus Caesar. I can’t argue about Augustus, but Caesar himself I can. You can say the time of Julius Caesar, late Roman Republic, time of Cicero (or other random Roman of that period), hell even dictatorship of Julius Caesar just for fun; but you cannot call it a reign, since he was not declared an official monarch/emperor. Yes, the Republic was in it’s death throws, but it still was not an official empire (or at the least a person that claimed a position higher than council or dictator) until Augustus became first emperor of Rome.

I agree with this article

the-rickmeiseter-general:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2274088/To-bury-Richard-III-Westminster-Abbey-finally-proper-national-resting-place-unfairly-maligned-monarch-all.html#comments-2274088

(Source: the-rickmeister-general)