Thanks Lalane for verifying what I knew all along - that when confronted with debate that the left can't handle they resort instead to name calling and tearing down the opposition.
Lets discuss your post in depth.
"if you can wade through your Reagan-cock-sucking morality. "
I have never sucked President Reagan's cock.
"The grunge trend was a revolt against 80's shallow materialism"
Funny, there were a lot of people who dressed this way. I thought it was a passing fashion trend.
"Also, in the 90's environmentalism became a big social concern, implementing changes on all levels"
If by this you mean, the environmentalism that has:
Robbed countless ranchers in the western US of their land, in the name of "keeping them pristine for our future generations" (with a KEEP OUT sign);
Burned up a huge chunk of the US forests with wildfires caused by rampant underbrush being left to dry and ignite on our "pristine government (now) owned land, which is not cared for or maintained, just left in a "pristine" state (meaning - no evil men allowed)
Forced recycling programs on us that, while they feel really good, do absolutely nothing for the environment, suck resources, and in many cases actually do more harm than good to the environment;
There are many books about the subject of "environmentalism" that counter your belief, although I admit to reading both sides of the environment debat If you care to actually engage in debate I would love to sometime. I can give you some books to reference on the subject:
The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the real State of the World, Bjorn Lomborg (sp?)
A great wesbite :
http://www.stewardsoftherange.org
Lever Action, by L. Neill Smith
The Ballad of Carl Drega - Essays on the Freedom Movement, by Vin Suprinowycz
Both of the above books have thought provoking chapters on the environmental movement.
"Equal rights with homosexuals were finally being tackled"
Well, this is great. Instead of doing what common sense would dictate - enforcing the laws on the books, government created yet another minority class. I would just bet that the gay community thanks you for that...now, instead of being chosen for a job based on merit, they will be part of the "quota" that employers just gotta have to avoid the feds from reaming them. Now, when a homosexual is murdered by some backwoods nimwit KKK wannabe who thinks he or she is doing God's will by ridding the world of the inherent homosexual evil, we prosecute it as a "hate crime", rather than linking up the DNA evidence, prosecuting the perp for murder 1 and sending them on the fast track to old sparky.
And, prior to the argument of how would my cracker ass know about how gays feel, I will tell you, my wife is a black woman of west indian descent, who runs the state program that provides money for AIDS patients in this area. One of my groomsmen in my wedding was a gay man.
"People were less concerned with being rich and "fitting in" and more concerned about unity and individual expression."
I refer you to my earlier post. By the way, it isn't morally wrong or inherently evil to aspire to have wealth or desire nice things - and it certainly isn't wrong to work however many jobs you see fit, or open a business and employ people and make money to obtain this goal. It is wrong to pump your stock price and dump the options, inflate earnings, hide losses, lie on your general ledger, file bankruptcy and pull the golden parachute cord while the commoners (the employees and the stockholders) are left holding the bag.
Its a shame that a generation of people has been taught that everyone lies, its ok.
What values are portrayed in the movies of the 90s? Are you referring to Pulp Fiction? Something about Mary? American Pie? Are these movies that much more wholesome than the R rated movies of the 80s? I enjoyed all of those movies I mentioned from the 90s...I found them funny, and found just as funny the people who left the theatre during Mary and Pulp Fiction in disgust. Please don't tell me that the movies of the 90s were more wholesome than the 80s. What is on the movie screens, TV and radio is a progression of what society permits over time. Is it not OK to question why this stuff is acceptable to society today when it wasnt 50 years ago? And, is it truly contributing to the overall lack of substance and values in American society today?