He's absolutely a liberal. Like you said, though, he has his moments of brilliance. In one of his more recent standup specials, he does a bit about dating that really confronts how terrifying it can be to be a woman in a world that marginalizes the safety and dignity of women. I still like him as a study in how people who aren't irredeemably brainwashed by anti-socialist rhetoric see capitalism (although he's probably at least partially brainwashed). His rant about how "everything is amazing; no one is happy" actually attracted offers to speak at conservative symposia, but I see something else in what he's saying: that the revolutionary capacity of capitalism has been exhausted. At one point, capitalism could take a country that only had a wooden plough, to borrow words from Churchill, and leave it with atomic weapons. Now what can capitalism do? It can give us the internet in the palm of our hands so we can "write a mean comment on YouTube while taking a dump."
He's a hilarious comic, but politically he's a liberal with a few moments of brilliance. His line on Capitalism was that he blamed people for shopping at Walmart instead of paying 'a few cents more' to shop at small businesses, which he see's as the foundation of any community: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N95IMKRkcBw He has voiced support for "Socialism" on one occasion, but he was referring to social democracy. His rants about "everything is amazing, and no one is happy," actually have the effect of dismissing criticism of capitalism. The unemployment rate, mass home foreclosures and global austerity don't matter; everything is amazing, because people have ATM's and Smartphones now. He's generally pretty solid on Gender and Race (except when he goes on Opie and Anthony,), and he had some real moments of working class brilliance early in his career, regarding the plight of the working people, but those are fewer and further between now.
Indeed it is.
Is Szekelyist a reference to Louis C.K. ?
