Ryan Reynolds is Wrong: The 80s Were Awesome, Man!

Ryan Reynolds has issues. Deadpool gave a deadpan opinion, whining about his childhood.

Every human being has issues they should be facing in their time. One would think that the last issue on his mind would be his thoughts on the 1980s.

Yet he insisted:

“The 80s was a brutal, brutal time for people. It was a fucking mess, and people forget that. It was a tremendous strife. Socio-political tensions everywhere. We were still pretty fresh off a Cuban Missile Crisis, which was only 15-20 years before. It’s a tumultuous period, but you look back at it now, and you’re like, ‘Oh, yeah. ‘Top Gun.’ Cocaine!’ Like, ‘No!’ It was really scary.”

I don’t know what planet he’s from. The 1980s rocked!--historic, epic, unprecedented, world-changing, even time-changing.

Forgive me a little bit of vanity, but the 1980s were great because I was born one week before the electors cast their ballots for Ronald Reagan. Good times were on their way!

The Great Communicator helped launch a conservative, free-enterprise-minded, right-wing restoration that swept the globe. Along with the UK’s Margaret “The Iron Lady” Thatcher and Canada’s Brian Mulroney, and even the first non-Italian pope in centuries, Pope John Paul II, a Zeitgeist of conservatism restored and reinvigorated a world stuck in stagflation, discouraged by dictators in Africa and South America, and, worst of all, menaced by the rogue Soviet Union, a lingering communist dystopia that instigated wars, undermined free countries, and pushed a megalomaniacal ideology responsible for the international slaughtering hundreds of millions.

Communism was the #1 bad guy, the Mr. Hand/Joker/Terminator/Predator/Hans Gruber of the 1980s. Despite communism’s ongoing economic and cultural collapse, academics were sadly, cynically convinced that there was no hope of ending communistic encroachment around the world. Even professors as sober and respectable as Arnold Toynbee, who wrote one of the most comprehensive reviews of history, resigned themselves to the idea that the Soviet Union would survive, and that free societies would decline and fail.

At the end of the decade, on a beautiful November evening, the world witnessed the collapse of the most insidious symbol of the Soviet Union and its vile economic and cultural tyranny: the Berlin Wall, signaling the demise of global communism. The West won. We won! At eight years old, I knew exactly what it meant. To see young men and women celebrating, dancing on that evil partition, breaking off pieces of that concrete monstrosity, popping off champagne, and reuniting with family members they had not seen for decades, I knew that this was an earth-shattering time, and a time of nothing but good.

Of course, I would be remiss to ignore the Pan-European Picnic that emerged in Eastern Europe, including Hungary, where men and women yearning for freedom began crossing into Austria, violating Soviet strictures. The breakdown of those border fences was the beginning of Soviet Communism’s timely end.

How about the stirring demise of Nicolae Ceaușescu of Romania? The people started fighting back, first by defending a church whose pastor had been speaking out against that evil dictator. And from that rebellion, the whole nation arose against an evil dictator, who was summarily tried, convicted, and executed on Christmas Day!

The 1980s were awesome, a tumultuous but terrific time when human beings would rise against tyranny and stand for truth and liberty once again.

Politics aside, the 1980s gave us some great culture.

The Goonies: Never say die! Ragtag boys saved their family home with an immense treasure. Men today celebrate that story, including the upset victory of Ke Huy Quan at the 2023 Academy Awards, which would never have happened without his Goonies breakout role.

Indiana Jones! The Last Crusade was not the last, but it was the best. What a great way to end the decade.

Star Wars Trilogy. Hello! The world learned in shock and wonder how the evil tyrant and fascist of the universe was actually the father of the freedom fighter. You can’t make this stuff up! It’s just so good. Star Wars set the stage for the political imagination of Western freedom overturning Communist tyranny, too!

Pretty in Pink, The Breakfast Club, 16 Candles: movies told us about the Gen-Xers becoming aware of themselves in a very turbulent, moving, powerful time. The 1980s were a very self-conscious era, but deservedly so. People were building, planning, and witnessing unprecedented cultural, political, and technological change. From Timothy Hutton in Ordinary People to Pee-Wee Herman to Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure (and Michael Keaton’s Batman), the 1980s witnessed the troubled, the geeks, the slackers overcome loss, pass the test, right the wrongs, win the day (and even win the girl), but still make it to the mall on time.

Speaking of the mall … Mall culture exploded in the 80s, a symbol of American fun, ease, and success even with excess. Lucky me in Torrance, CA, where I could eat and play at the largest shopping mall in the United States! From Aladdin’s Castle to McDonald’s indoors (which had all the cool statues and the bright colors), the 80s were a fun time!

How about the technology? We think that the Information Revolution exploded in 2007 with the iPhone and Twitter. Roll it back to the 80s, my dude. Just watching Wall Street showed everybody could start having TVs in your hand and record things with the press of a button. The technology was too expensive for everyday people, but the ideas were becoming reality. That’s the beauty of the free market! Great ideas start as luxuries for the rich, then become necessities for the rest of us, in part because innovation (i.e. greed) makes them affordable.

How about video games? From the Video Game Crash of 1983 emerged savvy licensing from Nintendo, then Sega, and eventually Atari got back in the game. We all know Mario, Luigi, Princess Toadstool (and don’t forget Link from the Legend of Zelda series!), and we still watch movies about them today.

The 1980s gave us blow-up images, big hairstyles, the bright (maybe tacky!) clothes, the chic that shook the world. And the ‘80s retro-futuristic art! We are seeing a revival of that neon futuristic style, complete with crisp colors and black backgrounds, with digitized flora and fauna. You don’t revive a style that reminds you of a bad time. George Clinton fused funk, rock, and art altogether! Do fries go with that shake? You bet!

And speaking of the music …

Let’s talk about my favorite, ELO, which was breaking out from its 70s send-off. How about Twisted Sister? Rod Stewart, the B-52s, the Cars; Madonna, plus Bonnie Tyler and her total eclipse over our hearts? From the hair bands to the Bangles, everyone was rocking (or walking like Egyptians). Who was one essential artist of the 80s? Weird Al Yankovic! He parodied the 1980s and made us love it all the more. Future generations are still rocking out to the 1980s and ripping off their rhythm and style, like The Weeknd’s Blinding Lights.

Ryan Reynolds is wrong. He may have struggled through a troubled childhood, but the 80s were an awesome decade, a seminal period of time that defined possibility, opportunity, and celebration for our time and all time.

Manhattan Beach School Board Member Jason Boxer: Closet Communist

The voters of Manhattan Beach Unified School District need to start paying attention to who ends up on their school board.

Easy Reader News published a very slanted, biased article blasting parents and propping up the school board members because of the growing outrage against school closures, lockdowns, and LGBT-CRT indoctrination in the classrooms.

One of the most noxious facts that they left out of their report is that Jason Boxer, one of the newly-elected school board members, is a card-carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America.

The first thing that comes to mind when I see this profile?

Oh brother! Imagine Barack Obama's "Pajama Boy" with lighter hair, and that's Jason Boxer.

But it gets worse ... much worse.

He's one of the "non-binary" types, and he pushes the LGBT agenda in so many destructive waves. You can see his destructive LGBT promotionalism on his Instagram account. Click here.

Ironically, he prefers "they/them" pronouns, according to his bio, but he also calls himself "a pretty nice guy."

Check it out here:

How can he claim to be non-binary but still call himself a "guy"? Clearly, he is confused.

And confused people should not be in charge of young people's education.

But the worst aspect about his tenure on the school board, again, is that he is a card-carrying socialist.

Don't take my word for it. Check out the DSA-LA website (Click here):

In addition to our endorsed candidates, we also celebrate the victories won by progressive candidates throughout the city, county, state, and country, both DSA-endorsed and otherwise. Locally, these include Jason Boxer for Manhattan Beach Unified School Board.

What do you need to know about socialism?

Take from Soviet Communist Vladimir Lenin himself:

Here are some statistics about Communism, for the growing number of uneducated or miseducated in the world:

How about hearing the testimonies of men and women who survived communist regimes?

Why were there so many "boat people" fleeing Southeast Asia in the 1970s? Communism!

Manhattan Beach residents need to pay attention to their school board races. Perhaps they need to think about launching a recall as soon as possible to get rid of this creepy soyboy.

It is unconscionable how bad it has gotten in local education politics in the South Bay. Card-carrying communists (masquerading as socialists) are seated on local school boards pushing all kinds of perversion under the guise of "Diversity, Equity, Inclusion", etc.

Instead of educating children about the true, full history of the United States, there is a determined push by ingrained Marxists and their teachers' union ilk to push racism and class-ism to further divide communities and the country.

Communism is one of the evilest ideologies in modern history, and to think that today, there are elected officials pushing this wicked madness is just unthinkable, and in the South Bay of Los Angeles County, no less.

Has Jason Boxer ever visited a country run under a communist regime? Cuba? Venezuela? North Korea? Would he like to explain why so many of the citizens in those countries are fleeing those countries to live elsewhere? Would Mr. Boxer (yes, Mister!) like to explain why Communism leaves nothing but destruction and desecration in its wake wherever it pops up?

He owes the people of Manhattan Beach some answers, at the very least.

He is pushing LGBT perversion. Why?

He is pushing Marxist hate. Why?

He does not listen or care about the real concerns of parents and children alike. Why?

Jason Boxer, the Closet Communist, needs to answer for these hateful leanings!

Contact the Manhattan Beach School Board, and demand Jason Boxer's removal!

jfenton@mbusd.org

speel@mbusd.org

jcochran@mbusd.org

cgraves@mbusd.org

jboxer@mbusd.org

Where Friedman Made a Mistake in Regards to Free Markets

Milton Friedman was a brillant economist, well-read and informed academic.

He brought forth a number of incredible, essential arguments to defend free enterprise and domestic economic liberty for businesses large and small. Don't get me wrong--I am all for free enterprise. Domestic economic freedom is an absolute must in any country, so that individuals can enjoy the highest standard of living possible.

BUT ... there is a place for government intervention in a number of issues.

1. Tariffs play an important role in securing the national security and interest of a country.

2. Illegal immigration and mass immigration are a bane for any country. No group of people, no mass movement of people should be permitted to overrun a country and complete change the contour and constitutional character of the nation.

This video exposes what the problem became for Milton Friedman's free market views--and Friedman himself admitted to the failure of one of his many tenets.

Check out this video from Reason Magazine here.

Friedman was convinced that the people of Hong Kong, China, elsewhere would rise up and oppose the taxpayer-funded subsidies for national businesses.

However, that never happened. Authoritarian regimes do not listen to the people whom they are supposed to care for. They do what they want. subsidize whatever businesses and interests they please. The pro-tariff arguments are stronger in these cases. Granted, tariffs can amount to a tax, but that only occurs if individuals purchase the goods from the other countries.

If authoritarian countries are subsidizing their goods and dumping them into other nations to undercut their industries, tariffs have to be imposed.

Friedman's argument in "Free to Choose" was not satisfactory for dealing with this problem. If a country lowers its tariffs in the face of countries with cheaper goods based on nationalized policies of currency manipulation and subsidies, the businesses in our country will fail and falter.

This problem occurs in Sub-Saharan countries, as well, in which Western nations offer a bunch of goods as "charity." For example, many countries will send in a bunch of free shoes to help an impoverished area. What happens, though? The local merchants go out of business, because they cannot compete with free."

Hence, the need for tariffs. The same idea is pervasive around the world. The United States was right to enact key tariffs to protect local industries against predatory policies from other countries. Open borders and open international markets can become problematic when these concerns are not taken into account.

Constitutional Citizen Victory at the Temecula City Council Meeting

We The People Rising http://wethepeoplerising.com EMAIL robinhvidston@wethepeoplerising.com Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

CITIZEN VICTORY AT THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5/14/19 Temecula, CA Report by Robin Hvidston VIEW  the city council meeting at the link below. Public comments begin at about 35 minutes. http://temeculaca.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=44 Louis Reyes and Bob Kowell were part of the team that organized patriots to attend the 5/14/19 Temecula City Council meeting.   Victory in Temecula! Citizens stood up for Resolution 19  in support of the U.S. Constitution that denounced socialism and communism. Read the resolution at the end of this email. At the previous city council meeting on 4/23/19, the mayor shelved Resolution 19 when dozens of leftists spoke out against the resolution. VIEW the left speaking at the 4/23/19 Temecula City Council meeting here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IalmMUK1kOY&t=10742s However, the citizens showed up in force at the following city council meeting on 5/14/19 and called for the resolution to be reintroduced and passed at a future council meeting. About 17 people spoke out during public comments in favor of the resolution and about 5 leftists spoke out in opposition to the resolution.  TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL https://temeculaca.gov/173/City-Council https://www.facebook.com/louis.reyes.925?fref=nf&__tn__=%2Cdm-R-R&eid=ARCAtyXj9u25dKyB32e_KJj_CghLgUMuxPpDj8kcBq_e-mrbp0E0tPOoZyxDJToftvItcb6MSujTqfn_ RESOLUTION 19 TEMCULA CITY COUNCIL

Follow on Twitter    Friend on Facebook    Forward to Friend  ROBIN HVIDSTON We The People Rising http://wethepeoplerising.wordpress.com/ Action Alert Our mailing address is: WE THE PEOPLE RISING 915 W. Foothill Blvd, #321 Claremont, CA 91711 Add us to your address book unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences

Rethinking Conservative Talking Points

Here are a few points of view that I had held for a long time without challenging their merits.

Since President Trump's election and inauguration, there are some ideas which I am challenging with clear evidence in our country and economy.

George Will once asserted, "Populism is not conservatism."

I used to accept this statement at face value. Will had asserted this statement on an ABC 7 "This Week" panel during Election 2008.

Will argued that the anti-elitism sentiment ultimately generates a larger government agenda.

Now I realize that populism which opposes the corrupt, anti-American, pro-globalist agenda is good.

And it in fact wants a reduction of the government into our lives. I cannot believe that I never challenged that precept from George Will. Populism is all about restoring power back to the people. Two Amendments in the Bill of Rights talk about restoring those rights.

Trump's pro-American nationalism, his pro-worker populism has enacted an incredible conservative agenda on many levels. The real sticking point for people like Will and the rest of the cloistered political elites is illegal immigration. They don't understand the costs or the consequences of this destructive problem. They don't live with illegal aliens ravaging their neighborhoods. They don't understand the pain and frustration of losing jobs and quality of life to ongoing foreign invaders.

The distant arrogance of these talking head conservatives is stifling.

John Stossel: "Trade deficits don't matter."

The argument about trade deficits, which means that a country is importing more goods than exporting, had concluded for me with John Stossel's analogy of a grocery store.

"I engage in a trade deficit every time I go shopping at the grocery store. If the store had to buy something from me in order for me to purchase something from them, they would go out of business."

I look back on this analogy, and I realize now how naive it is. A country is not a grocery store. Countries are not just markets or economies.

A free market is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a free society. The United States is a free yet also sovereign nation. There are other nations near and far which oppose our free way of life. Why would we want to trade with them?

Reason.com: "Tariffs are bad."

I would allow for tariffs on a general scale if the income tax were repealed. A tariff is a tax which consumers would have to pay for, but that cost would be offset by no longer paying an income tax.

Tariffs are good for national security reasons. Why should the People's Republic of China dump cheap goods into our country, and they in turn use the money they are making to undermine us further?

These are some talking points I have learned to review and challenge now that President Trump is back in office. Note, however, that tariffs as a rule create higher costs and disproportionately affect different parts of the country. A full-on trade war with other countries furthered the economic recession that led to the Great Depression in the early 1930s.

Tariffs, if any are imposed, must be strategic.

Social "Conservatism" Matters -- Here's Why (From Carlos Flores)

The movement among Blue State Republicans is to abandon social issues, or cultural concerns. They are too divisive, and make it more difficult for conservatives to appeal to the "young generation", since most people are more progressive.

Right? Then again, since when has expanding abortion or welcoming the destruction of marriage and family ever counted as progressive?

So, should we give up on "social conservatism"?

Maybe it just needs rebranding, or better yet, why not make the case with facts, logic, and evidence?
Social conservatism not only matters, but is essential to our culture, to our society. Without it, there would be no fiscal discipline, no fiscal conservatism for men and women to fight for.

Carlos Floresm Senior Social Policy Editor for The Millennial Review, provides an exacting and excellent article on the essential necessities of social conservatism.

Let us begin with his definition of social conservatism:

So what is social conservatism? Social conservatism, I submit, consists of (1) the recognition of the family as the most important unit of the polity and (2) the project of securing the social conditions that make strong families possible.


I would add the protection of life, which speaks to abortion, assisted suicide, and if some pundits insist, the death penalty.

Check out this profound statement on the importance of family:

The social conservative understands, often instinctively, that the primacy of the family unit makes the existence of the state possible. Adults who are ready to engage in political activity do not just spontaneously come to be, after all; men must have their intellectual, moral, and social capacities and characters formed before they are ready to participate in a political endeavor.

Before there was government, there was family.

Before there was family, there was marriage, the union of one man and one woman.

Not two men, and not two women.

Every essential aspect for our culture, for our civilization depends on the transmission of values, of shared goals and aspirations. The government cannot provide this institutional passage of knowledge. Only the family can do this, and it takes a family to raise children and ensure the survivals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The state cannot exist without the family.

Flores asserts this truth perfectly:

To the social conservative, it is clear that abortion, same-sex marriage, and transgenderism all constitute threats to the family, and hence to society.

Flores follows this statement with incredible commentary:

[T]he transactions that make up an economic system presuppose the existence of virtuous persons who are disposed to engage in them well. Marriage is not irrelevant to this project—on the contrary, it is the means by which human beings are raised into virtuous persons who have the rational, social, and ethical virtues that allow them to engage in such transactions.

Virtue cannot be imposed by government fiat, however. The capacity to trust, to ensure mutual transaction, plus the necessity to hold and expound sweet customs--all of this does not come about through force or government excess. These values result from culture, from shared values. These values are transmitted through education, not indoctrination.

[W]hat is desired in an economic system is that the persons who engage in the transactions will be already disposed to engage in them well even in the absence of deterrents imposed by law against improperly engaging in transactions, just as it is desirable—and conducive to the common good—for citizens to be disposed to engage lawfully and morally even in the absence of deterrents attached to actions that are immoral (like murder). Penalties and benefits, then, should be best understood as complementary policies that provide additional reasons to engage in transactions well, not as stand-alone systems that can by themselves replace the rearing of children in accordance with virtue.

A free market cannot be free if men and women do not feel free to engage in transactions in the marketplace. No one is going to open up a business or engage in mutual transactions if there is no certain of peace and prosperity. Many businesses, small and large, leave cities and even countries because the rule of law is absent, and the costs of conducting business through massive defense and security measures is just too costly.

What is the point of going into business if the owner has to spend most of his time protecting his business through frequent imposition of force? The values, the mores of trust, integrity, appreciation of value, conflict management do not come about out of nothing. These are essential practices to trade and freedom which cannot be imposed or infused by state power.

It takes a family.

Also ... Flores lists the exorbitant costs associated with the loss of human capital because of fatherlessness, at approximately $99 billion a year. For fiscal-only conservatives, one has to ask how prudent it is to ignore the concerns about life and family, when such a price tag looms as a consequence. The Patrick Moynihan study revealed that the break down the family, specifically the black family, was leading to the skyrocketing poverty and incarceration rates among those populations. 

Who ends up paying for these costs? We the People, the taxpayers, including the social conservatives who had warned our fellow fiscal conservative colleagues. Not very conservative in a fiscal sense, now, is it? Life matters, natural marriage matters, and family matters. Conservatives cannot claim to be fiscally conservative if they reject social conservatism.