Yes, normally the Boondocks does do great satire. Yes, they have gone overboard before.
But I highly doubt that you can have a soul* and not find this entertaining. 
*Any who admit a lack of humor in the link’s contents can wait until next week’s Soul Special at your local Wal-Mart. Good, quality souls for cheap.
That’s it!!
Boondocks is going to be added to my roster of comix I read everyday.! 
Yeah, I was highly entertained too. In fact, The Boondocks makes me smile pretty often.
And here I thought the one from yesterday was pretty hilarious!
Meh, I say, meh.
Could someone show me an example of where the cartoonist went too far? Seriously, I haven’t seen one (I admit I don’t read it regularly) that I thought went too far, and I’d like to.
Well, that depends on what you understand by “going overboard”. If someone means that at times he ladles out the “message” so thick that by the third panel of Tuesday’s strip (out of a week-long sequence) you’re going “JEEZUS, MAN, OKAY, I GET IT, I GET IT!” then about twice a month. 
The joke was funny…the constant piling-on about WalMart is tiresome. Almost tiresome enough to make the joke unfunny.
Well, I don’t think he goes to far, but the recent strips dealing with Bush’s purported drug use were enough to get the strip pulled from some papers. I’m sure yesterday’s strip (N.G.R.O.E. vs. N.G.G.R.) will ruffle a few feathers.
I stopped actively reading Boondocks back in 2000, when the artist made a strip about Alan Keyes, the black Republican candidate, during the primaries. It came out the week after Keyes had been in town for a local campaign stop, and I’d watched it on local access TV, because I was interested in what he had to say. Keyes’ platform was vague, at best. He had a number of policy positions that I was sympathetic to, but no plan. Now, by this time, Keyes had lost all chance of the nomination, if he’d ever had one, so he may well have been just focusing debate on issues he was concerned with, but still, after seeing him speak I knew I wasn’t going to vote for him.
The Boondocks that week was about a nominal Republican saying he thought that Keyes was saying a lot of good stuff, but when asked if he was going to vote for Keyes, he responded: “And let a black in the White House?! Hell, no!” (Actually, I think it was the n-word, but I’m not sure.)
After that, if that’s the only reason that the artist could see for someone to not vote for Keyes, I had no desire to pollute my brain with his bile.
Funny, I thought those two would be working for Microsoft.
(I must admit this is the only Boondocks that has ever made me laugh out loud.)
No, Microsoft is Snowball the hamster’s turf.
Me, I’m just glad to see new P&B material again.
The Boondocks today is what Doonesbury was thirty years ago. It “goes too far” only because it isn’t afraid to hork off the Powers That Be.
Yeah, and Clinton’s purported blowjobs.
Meh. Boondocks’ take on Wal-Mart is nothing compare to South Park’s, 12/20/04. http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/GuidePageServlet/showid-344/epid-372424/, http://www.sbs.com.au/southpark/, http://www.cyburbia.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=11614&sort=1&size=medium&cat=6160
Yeah, well, if you can’t tell the difference between the author’s position, and the author satirizing Republican attitudes, maybe you should stick to Ziggy. Today his parrot was surprised that they were having round crackers.
No, I would disagree. Bad taste is bad taste, no matter who it’s “horking off.”
There really is no difference in the author’s position and what he writes in the strip. I think we all KNOW the author was attempting to satirize, what YOU seem to fail to realize is that his satire reveals all too much about his position.
But what is there in Boondocks (or Doonesbury) that constitutes “bad taste”? I’ve heard various criticisms leveled at both strips, but never that.
Is this statement a generality, or specific to Boondocks? If the later, how do you know this, exactly?