Despite the hype, 1990s actually sucked

By J. DeVoy


11 Responses to Despite the hype, 1990s actually sucked

  1. Sean F. says:

    It had it’s highs and lows. Super bright colors in random arrangements were a low, but still…

    Best. Decade. Ever.

  2. Darren says:

    That is amazing.

  3. biber hapı says:

    uper bright colors

  4. Marty says:

    make it stop.

  5. Tony says:

    The NY Rangers won the Stanley Cup, for the first time in 54 years.

    Nirvana, Alice In Chains, Soundgarden, Red Hot Chili Peppers, need I say more.

    For most of the decade (1993- 1999) we had a President who had a clue.

    We had an economic boom, and no one had heard of “9/11” or “Al Qaeda”.

    And from a personal standpoint, let’s just say that I enjoyed the 90’s for the first time unlike any previous decade. And my son was born in ’98. Put two and two together.

    So bright colors notwithstanding, the 1990’s rocked. If a time warp made me repeat 1990 through 1999 ad infinitum, I would be smiling for eternity…

    • J DeVoy says:

      I don’t know anything about hockey.

      I’ll give you Alice In Chains, Nine Inch Nails’ two best albums, Spahn Ranch’s “The Coiled One,” and most of the Brian Jonestown Massacre’s catalogue. But I’ll raise you Genesis/Gabriel/Collins, Skinny Puppy, Slayer, Nine Inch Nails’ first album, Front 242, Depeche Mode and The Cure (to say nothing of Metallica, Slayer, etc.)

      And from the standpoint who was 10 in 1995 and the internet really took off – i.e. someone without capital and legal standing to invest in it – yes, it TOTALLY sucked, especially given the investing wasteland of 2010.

  6. JPF says:

    I agree with 80’s > 90’s

    • Sean F. says:

      Please don’t do this. I really didn’t mean anything with my first comment. It was just a joke. All decades are the best decade ever for different reasons and to different people. Let’s just leave it at that.

%d bloggers like this: