Season two started a couple weeks ago. Amazing show. Discussssssss

Season two? Awesome. Must see. First season was absolutely hilarious.

---

I think I will forever call this show "Boombox" in my head.

At a party once, (well, after the party died down, and we all just sat around doing nothing, since half of us could barely stand anymore), we turned on the TV, and this was on.
so a friend of mine yelled up stairs "Hey! Boondocks is on TV, get down here!"
and then some guy just said "What?? Boombox is on? I don't hear any music"


But great show though, gets away with using "carp" so much (a bit TOO much, but I guess thats a bit of the humor is). I enjoy it though. Haven't seen any of season 2, but I really liked season 1.

---

Technically McGruder is using "carp". A term used to describe the group of black people that basically breed all of the negative stereotypes that plague the african community today.

I like this show sometimes, other times I hate it. It seems rather hit-and-miss.

Every episode makes a statement about a current issue. I don't see it as a hit and miss at all.

Every episode makes a statement about a current issue. I don't see it as a hit and miss at all.

The terrorist episode didn't really connect with me. They had a bunch of automatics in their back room; they seemed like terrorists to me.

The Martin Luther King episode was amazing.

Technically McGruder is using "carp". A term used to describe the group of black people that basically breed all of the negative stereotypes that plague the african community today.

I love how they actually spell it that way too when Huey is talking about a "carp Moment." XD

---

Every episode makes a statement about a current issue. I don't see it as a hit and miss at all.

The terrorist episode didn't really connect with me. They had a bunch of automatics in their back room; they seemed like terrorists to me.

That episode was a metaphor for how the "war on terror" started. Look at it this way;

They go into the store and say the clerk has a weapon(think "of mass destruction") that he doesn't actually have. Ed/Gin then begin to steal from the store.(think oil)

The clerk retaliates in self defense of the attempted robbery. In the end the police take the middle eastern men to jail, and Ed/Gin are treated as heroes, for robbing a store.

It can also be noted that the character of Ed represents George W. and Gin represents Cheney.

I read the comic. :c

I read the comic. :c

I've been reading what I can find online, it's pretty bad carp.

Every episode makes a statement about a current issue. I don't see it as a hit and miss at all.

The terrorist episode didn't really connect with me. They had a bunch of automatics in their back room; they seemed like terrorists to me.

That episode was a metaphor for how the "war on terror" started. Look at it this way;

They go into the store and say the clerk has a weapon(think "of mass destruction") that he doesn't actually have. Ed/Gin then begin to steal from the store.(think oil)

The clerk retaliates in self defense of the attempted robbery. In the end the police take the middle eastern men to jail, and Ed/Gin are treated as heroes, for robbing a store.

It can also be noted that the character of Ed represents George W. and Gin represents Cheney.

The fact that they had a bunch of machine guys destroyed this metaphor for me.

Every episode makes a statement about a current issue. I don't see it as a hit and miss at all.

The terrorist episode didn't really connect with me. They had a bunch of automatics in their back room; they seemed like terrorists to me.

That episode was a metaphor for how the "war on terror" started. Look at it this way;

They go into the store and say the clerk has a weapon(think "of mass destruction") that he doesn't actually have. Ed/Gin then begin to steal from the store.(think oil)

The clerk retaliates in self defense of the attempted robbery. In the end the police take the middle eastern men to jail, and Ed/Gin are treated as heroes, for robbing a store.

It can also be noted that the character of Ed represents George W. and Gin represents Cheney.

The fact that they had a bunch of machine guys destroyed this metaphor for me.

It's a cartoon....basically all convenience stores in any well populated urban American location have firearms behind the counter.

Ed/Gin had machine guns as well.

Yes, but I expected them too!

Sorry, the metaphor was completely lost due to their seemingly immediate preparation of SEVERAL machine guns.

Yes, but I expected them too!

Sorry, the metaphor was completely lost due to their seemingly immediate preparation of SEVERAL machine guns.

You should watch the episode again. After about 2 minutes of loud shouting about "robbery", "terrorist" and "gun", two men who were in the next room came out. One with 2 pistols, one with a small machine gun. You really aren't being fair in your assessment.

Yes, but I expected them too!

Sorry, the metaphor was completely lost due to their seemingly immediate preparation of SEVERAL machine guns.

You should watch the episode again. After about 2 minutes of loud shouting about "robbery", "terrorist" and "gun", two men who were in the next room came out. One with 2 pistols, one with a small machine gun. You really aren't being fair in your assessment.

I don't believe ANY convenience store owner would have a MACHINE GUN in their store unless something was up. If there was like, one handgun in the store, it would've made more sense.

Just because my opinion isn't the same as yours doesn't mean my assessment isn't fair. :\

Brad is right. It was lost to me because of the HEAVY ARTILLERY that the "terrorist" store owners had. Why the hell was there someone back there packing heat in the first place? That freaked me a bit...

---

It's all about the awesomeness that is Uncle Ruckus.

/thread

---

I'm Ommy
http://unqualify.blogspot.com

I don't believe ANY convenience store owner would have a MACHINE GUN in their store unless something was up. If there was like, one handgun in the store, it would've made more sense.

Just because my opinion isn't the same as yours doesn't mean my assessment isn't fair. :\

Brad is right. It was lost to me because of the HEAVY ARTILLERY that the "terrorist" store owners had. Why the hell was there someone back there packing heat in the first place? That freaked me a bit...

I honestly don't know what to say other than you are both wrong about the plot then.

I don't believe ANY convenience store owner would have a MACHINE GUN in their store unless something was up. If there was like, one handgun in the store, it would've made more sense.

Just because my opinion isn't the same as yours doesn't mean my assessment isn't fair. :\

Brad is right. It was lost to me because of the HEAVY ARTILLERY that the "terrorist" store owners had. Why the hell was there someone back there packing heat in the first place? That freaked me a bit...

I honestly don't know what to say other than you are both wrong about the plot then.

Honestly, the writer simply did not do a coherent enough job at this point to clearly state his stance. It went from being morally vague to a complete misrepresentation of the point he was trying to get across.

Honestly, the writer simply did not do a coherent enough job at this point to clearly state his stance. It went from being morally vague to a complete misrepresentation of the point he was trying to get across.

Well I checked wiki and it backs up everything I said. I guess it's just you.

Deja Vu anybody? It's a pretty funny show to me.

---

this is dumb, anyone can make up an obscure question with not enough logical hints to lead to an answer
that's not a riddle, it's a waste of time

This is of my favorite Brad quotes from the good old days (Click to View)

...

It's a plastic model. You really don't want me to answer that question. rofl

Hi Roan,

It seems that you've accidentally found yourself in a topic you're not at all interested in. Please click http://forums.beywiki.com to return to the forums index.

Thanks,

Tamer Brad
Beywiki.com Staff

Honestly, the writer simply did not do a coherent enough job at this point to clearly state his stance. It went from being morally vague to a complete misrepresentation of the point he was trying to get across.

Well I checked wiki and it backs up everything I said. I guess it's just you.

Ugh. I'm not saying that it wasn't his intention. I'm saying it wasn't coherently presented.

Honestly, the writer simply did not do a coherent enough job at this point to clearly state his stance. It went from being morally vague to a complete misrepresentation of the point he was trying to get across.

Well I checked wiki and it backs up everything I said. I guess it's just you.

Ugh. I'm not saying that it wasn't his intention. I'm saying it wasn't coherently presented.

gg replying a week later to a pretty much ended argument