Sign The Petition Against The Kilometre Tax!

This may be of interest depending how you value your privacy and right to liberty.

The Quebec government wants to monitor our movements either through putting a GPS chip in our cars or (as if that isn't outrageously creepy enough) put cameras across the province and country. 

At the end of the year, they will present us with a bill for 'over usage'.  You may think you're ok with that but your movements will be logged. The CTF (of which I'm a member) sufficiently thinks this idea needs to be dealt wit and is soliciting support from the public. It has determined they will petition the government and I agree with their position. 

And consider becoming a member! 


This is a good example of why the climate change system change movement is really used by government to justify eroding our civil liberties. 

If they succeed with this outrageous and preposterous measure the flood gates will be open. They can demand to monitor our lives full stop.

I can't believe this is even being considered.

I'm extremely puzzled and troubles that there are citizens who proposed this.

Don't be indifferent. Take a stand any way you can.

Something Stinks In Justin's Canada: Elections Commissioner And Investigators Enabling Troubling Trend Of Censorship

Do these guys Tim Mackin and Paul Couture know how ridiculous they look?

I especially didn't care for Mr. Couture's body language at all.

Couture also asks Levant 'what kind of person was he looking for as volunteers.' I watched in utter disbelief at this asshole having the temerity to ask such a question. Apparently, we can't be critical of idiots like Justin and Gerald Butts? Who are they to command such protection?

What am I watching? 

And just what the heck is Louise Panneton up to exactly with this scam?

How are this trio remotely serving the interests of Canadians?

This video really angered me. I'm not a fan of Rebel Media but I do accept their right to practice journalism and don't appreciate tax dollars being used in this manner. Isn't this what a damn free society progressive liberals always talk about is supposed to be?

The RCMP, as an aside, refuses to investigate Trudeau and engages in police state bull shit bullying against journalists.

And where exactly is the media in all this? Where are Ivison and Wherry and others? They published their books without being called in for questioning. Do they not think this is outrageous behaviour by the government?

Or are they okay with it?

Oh. Tim and Paul? Go fuck yourselves. 


Is Youtube's Demoniitzation Scheme Illegal?

I'm not expert but this is just an observation.

As an employer, it would be illegal for me to with hold someone's pay that was rightfully earned. I certainly can't do so on the basis or premise along religious or political lines as this would be inappropriate if not unjust.

Furthermore, I must comply with all sorts of wage laws or else face penalties and/or fines.

Youtube benefits from the content created from others. And it is true content creators and providers aren't employees of youtube but youtube is financially profiting immensely from the fruits of their labour.

Yet, they often demonetize channels who run afoul of their notorious algorithms. This is akin to with holding someone's pay in my view. Especially if it was to ever be proven its politically motivated or there's another agenda at play.

Youtube shouldn't be allowed to do this anymore a small business or corporation can't. There's all sorts of rules and laws in place where you can't say 'we're a private business ergo we set the policies'. Those policies must conform to set laws.

In my view, Youtube's behaviour is unprofessional if not immoral. It should be illegal.

They stand in the way of someone's right to the 'pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.'

Time for them to account for their actions like a mature company.


Illiberal Voices: Bernie And AOC

Two things caught my eye this week. The first one is Project Veritas releasing footage of Bernie supporters advocating for re-education against conservatives (in the context of the left this is usually done through coercion and even violence) and speaking, shall we say, fondly of gulags. The second is Alexandra Ocasio Cortez's claim that the DNC is a centrist/conservative party.

I'll try my best to dissect each.

I'm not surprised people in the Sanders rank and file believes or thinks this. He is, after all, a socialist. We know that he was part of communist organizations and at one point praised Hugo Chavez.

In many ways, Sanders is unfit to govern or lead a nation of men. He's actually weak. The fact he hasn't condemned and fired these sorry buffoons is telling. Moreover, it's worth recalling he endorsed Hillary in 2016 despite the rigging of the primaries and doesn't think, despite the mounting information pointing to it, Biden is corrupt.

Not fit.

Ocasio-Cortez's preposterous claim is equally as troubling because it's an attempt to redefine terms and definitions.

Characterize and redefine your enemies as 'extreme'. Next, position yourself as 'centrist'. Suddenly, ideas like the GND (it's for the environment!) and other far left ideas can be sold as 'centre'. That's her ploy.

I suppose to a leftist completely ignorant of history, conservatives have 'pulled right' without giving thought to the perhaps this perception is a result of how progressives have done nothing but characterize people as racist and misogynist? They've completely debased the the meanings of each so much so many of us qualify.

The Democrat party is NOT centrist. It is ideological. How one can watch the debates and conclude their platforms are centre-right is beyond comprehension. Like the Liberals up here, this is a progressive party and all she's doing is moving goal posts around.

Both AOC and Bernie admit to being socialists. So why would anyone accept her assertion?

This is standard MO in the left-wing playbook. Go back and read Lenin, Hitler, and Stalin carefully.

It's not the GOP (and conservatives) who have moved right.

It's the DNC (and Liberals) who have been pulling centre.

AOC is trying to pull a fast one on people. It has been objectively demonstrated by Pew and The Economist (and the NYT of all places) that the DNC is the party of extremism.

What part of her platform can be construed as centrist or conservative? I know words have no meanings anymore (and heaven knows people just pull out political philosophical definitions seemingly out of thin air without thought to history or context) but her clam is unacceptable and inaccurate.

Don't believe her.

Tread carefully.

There are illiberal forces in our midst.

And this is troubling. 


The U.S. and Iran: Some Context

"And I ran, I ran so far away. I couldn't get away.' A Flock of Seagulls.

"Everyone is full of shit". T.C.

Didn't your hear? America is going to war with I-ran. You can't get away from it.

Oh my.

I can't keep up with the spinning of the spinned news by spinsters anymore. They just rewrite history as they go along.

It certainly helps to revise history by acting as if the world started on November 2016.

That way you can pretend anything Trump does as literally the first thing to ever happen.

What's especially astonishing to me is how easily smart people are converted into NPCs swallowing whole the idiotic narratives pimped out.

I believed we all operated from a common baseline of what is truth and what is not. For example, even if one held ruthless criticism of American foreign policy they still understood the difference between objecting to how foreign policy is conducted and playing useful idiot outright enemies.

There seems to have been a relativist malaise that set in where people can no longer distinguish between fact from fiction.

Iran presented itself as a perfect example.

No sooner had the news come out the United States killed Soleimani, people over-reacted to the news convinced WWIII was commencing and with it the reigniting of the draft.

The emotional just took over the rational. All knowledge of what we know about Iran-American relations and the history of the region in proper context was incinerated in an instant.

All of a sudden out came from their basement the anti-war protestors shouting, 'No war with Iran!' t

The killing of a terrorist or military general like Soleimani aren't declarations of war. They can be perceived, as the media has been hammering at, provocations leading to an escalation of war but the act in of itself is not a declaration of one. Hence, the argument the President need not go through Congress thanks to the expansion of power of the executive granted by the AUMF as part of the ongoing war on terror.

Know what is? Constant provocations (including the killing of private contractors and military personnel  and attacking a foreign embassy are. 

Iran has been running amok in the region facing little consequences for their violent acts and a message was sent to the theocracy.

The press led by the usual suspects - New York Times et al -  spewed their typical anti-American posture by running interference for an enemy.

In one instance, a writer at The New Yorker romanticized the beastly Solemaini. Major publication have a fetish for despicable humans. Recall Rolling Stone magazine putting on its cover a murderer in Tsarnaev - the Boston Marathon bomber. And in the after math of the incident, we had the added tragic shooting down of a passenger plan filled with innocents (and mostly Canadians - of whom almost half held Iranian passports) by the cynical and beastly hands of Iran resulting in blowback from its own citizens the regime didn't see coming.

I will attempt to demonstrate here none of this has anything to do with being anti-war and that in fact is everything about anti-Trump hysterics. 


An essay on this incident here.


It's hard to unpack all that has been said since the assassination but, a couple of assertions caught my attention. One is the claim 'America went rogue' (as MacLean's here in Canada and other publications did)  and to those who pretended to be more measured conceded the hit was fair game but asked if it was a 'wise' move claiming it would 'embolden Iran'.

Many actions (conducted through the ghoulishly comical CIA) by the U.S. since the coup they helped orchestrate in 1953 resulting in the installing of The Shah, were seldom 'wise' and fair territory for criticism. It remains to be seen exactly how his death impacted the region - if at all.

Fast forward to the Iran deal under Obama where the 'unwise' move was thought to threaten the deal. But were the Iranians adhering to it as alleged?

Key buzz phrases used to help build the narrative such as 'escalation of war' and Soleimani being an 'imminent threat', were designed to give the appearance of Trump 'going rogue.'

Here's an excellent in-depth timeline of Iran's proliferation issues. In it, you'll see just how intricate. 


It's important to pay close attention to the arc of this story that stretches back decades; if not centuries in the context of the Sunni-Shia war for the Caliphate. That way, it helps inoculate from potentially falling prey how the issue is being portrayed.

Let's tackle the the 'rogue' part, in our effort to bring context, because it's simple and straightforward.

While going through Congress (note, Bush got authorization from Congress to invade Iraq which is why the media couldn't use the 'rogue' angle but instead claimed it was 'unilateral' which was another way of saying 'rogue') to consent on a proposed military measure. There's a lot of leeway and nuance and interpretations to how the Commander in Chief can lead the nation into war. But one little tidbit the people saying 'gone rogue' aren't mentioning is the Use of Authorized Military Force introduced under the Patriot Act in 2001 which gives expanded powers to the Executive to prosecute the war on terror. 

"...The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001. In December 2016, the Office of the President published a brief interpreting the AUMF as providing Congressional authorization for the use of force against al-Qaeda and other militant groups."

And expand they did. Which brings me to Obama. Obama utilized the UAMF to raw point of being the only President in U.S. history to be at war every single say of his Presidency. The irony, of course, is for someone who lamented having 'inherited a mess' from Bush, he handed messy conflicts of his doing to Trump. That's how the ball rolls.

I won't go further into this because it would end up being a book but I'll close with one simple fact that should dispel once and for all Trump's decision was a 'provocation of war 'and was proof of his 'mental illness'. The Obama administration, of which Hilary was instrumental, killed Muammar Ghaddafi. An actual leader of a sovereign country. That action has had serious ramifications for Europe to this day and the migrant crisis it helped foster.

Also killed by the previous administration were Bin laden. Al Bagdadhi and al-Awlaki. 

How convenient to over look this. Another inconvenient reality is Iran's constant aggression and penchant for mayhem in the region. Arabs fear Iran, Israel is annoyed and on guard against them, while in Turkey around 60% of the population views Iran favourably despite relative peace between the two counties.


"Folks clutching their pearls that Trump might be leading us to war were awfully quiet when Droney McPeaceprize dropped 26,000 bombs in 2016, and had military actions in 7 nations."

"Obama conducted more strikes in his first year than Bush carried out during his entire presidency. A total of 563 strikes, largely by drones, targeted Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during Obama’s 2 terms.... Between 384 and 807 civilians were killed."

Yet, where was all this hysteria then? Does Trump remotely match this record?

Thus proving we have shallow grasps of foreign affairs and that this is more anti-Trump sentiment than anything rooted in principles.

Trump killing a popular general is proof of his incompetence for bring the nation closer to war. Yet, when he correctly assessed it was better for the U.S. to pull out of Syria (along the way we were once again treated to disingenuous cries of having abandoned the Kurds not realizing the nation was divided into five factions and the one they were supporting were the communist PKK. But they're Kurds, right? As long as we use them to bash Trump!) , the very same 'anti-war' people chastised him for 'doing it the wrong way'. Which is it?

Of course, it's better for the United States to just pull out of the region but as we saw with Syria, the intoxication of war is well entrenched among the establishment.


As noted, the media was turning Soleimani into a victim who was popular and good looking. The press loves to romanticize monsters. They portrayed him as merely a defender of his country. But he was much worse than that as reports have clearly indicated.

Nor was the hit a 'Black Swan'.

Israel and the United States had been considering killing him for about 15 years but both Bush and Obama declined to do so. Trump, for his part, took his shot.

So began the histrionics that war was coming.

Except behind the noise, the chances of war was slim all along. Notice how the media has suddenly gone silent as they pivot back to the theatrics of impeachment.

For a couple of reasons. 

1) Trump isn't irrational. And Iran may be a brutal and loathsome theocracy (who murder protestors (incidentally in which Soleinmani orchestrated) and kill gays) aren't either.

2) Iran doesn't have the financial recourses to fight a war. Moreover, the regime is constantly under threat from within from its own population. 

3) Even if it did decide to declare war, they would not mount much of a resistance to the United States. The U.S. can easily disrupt and destroy all major facilities within a week without committing a single solider on the ground. Recall, this is a country who fought Iraq to a stalemate in the 80s. Who could forget the cartoonish lobbing of grenades between the two? That country is going to fight America in a war? This country? Really?

Iran wasn't emboldened by the move. But know what may in fact keep them at least confident? The media (and the Democrats) constantly siding with them.

The first three points move to debunk the idea of 'escalation of war'.

4) As to Soleimnai as an imminent threat. How can someone who has been the chief architect of terrorist activities for almost decades and was targeted by the U.S. and Isreal, be an imminent threat? He was a constant threat. He was at the heart of Iran's plans to dominate Iraq and with it the wider Middle-East posing a huge problem for Arab neighbours as well as Turkey and Israel.

There was, also, a cult of the personality growing around Soleimani. He was increasingly challenging the Ayatollah's power even engaging in unauthorized activities without regard to the Mullahs wishes. So confident he had become, he felt safe meeting with Lebanese Hizbollah (I believe) leaders in open space in an airport field in Tehran at the time the U.S. slew him.

In some way, I wouldn't be surprised if the Iranian felt a favour was done for them as he was probably growing into a problem but they couldn't risk killing him given his popularity.

It's not like this hasn't happened before.

Consider the Soviet General Georgy Zhukov. Serving under Stalin, he had grown too popular and powerful controlling large portions of the Red Army. As a result, Stalin could only change his positions.

In the end, the Iranians 'saved face' and attacked a base half-assedly and everything just kinda diffused itself.


At the end of the day, the Americans took out a bad dude as they've been doing since the War on Terror began. The antics of the Democrats demanding the be notified is just political posturing. Why? As mentioned, because the AUMF dictates the CinC need not do so.

However, let's say Trump decided to inform them. Given the way they've treated him, it's not out of the realm of possibility they would use this as a weaponized political tool and refuse to authorize action merely to humiliate him.

For three years all they've done, in trying to orchestrate a soft coup (notice how Hilary and Obama keep in the news while John Kerry jet-sets around the world conducting a shadow foreign policy. Since when do former administrations behave this way? How is this not treasonous behaviour?) is hold the country hostage. The fact they expected Trump come to them in good faith while they've been impeaching him goes to show how feckless and partisan they've become. They'd side with Iran just to 'stick it' to Trump.

Don't listen to me. Does Pelosi's threat sound like a party who wouldn't make a scene?

Acting as if somehow Trump is lawless, mentally ill and acting on impetus impulses that operate outside the realm of this reality takes one helluva a leap of logic.


Word to the Iranian protestors. You guys have balls. Good luck. You can't count on the anti-American left and media supporting you but you have the silent majority quietly praying and hoping for your safety and success.

That is not to say, there aren't legitimate counter points against having assassinated Solemaini. There are. One can even go a step further and argue whether or not the United States should be present in the Middle-East in the fist place.

They can dispute and criticize actions under taken over the years. They can debate the merits - or not - of American foreign policy in the entire region.

But what they're not entitled to is to pretend Trump is 'bumbling into war' based on breathlessly obvious flimsy facts and hyper-partisanship as if everything began in 2016.

My goal was to shed some light into the entire incident and perhaps help contextualize (infused with personal opinion of course) the unfolding events.


Last, I completely reject yet another dubious assertion claiming Trump's actions led to the shooting down of a Ukrainian passenger airline killing everyone on board including 62 Canadians.

It's tragic but Canadians are best to keep their anger directly where it belongs: With Iran.

By all accounts, this plane was 'marked for death' by Iran. There was no soldier scared of America attacking Iran since the plane was taking off from Tehran. The closest American bases are in Iraq.

There's been reports the Iranian grounded all planes except that one which obviously is suspicious and have held on to the blackbox. Worse, they have since bull dozed the crash site (which is appalling and points to their depravity) before Ukrainian and Canadian officials could ever go and investigate. Clearly, they have something to hide.

And we all know what it is. They purposely and fiendishly shot down the plane in an effort to have the media turn on Trump. And people are buying it like fools. Imagine hating Trump so much so as to believe the very worse to the point of believing Iran. 

By contrast, the Iranian people aren't fools like we are in the West. They're keeping their ire and anger squarely where it belongs: With the Mullahs.

So bizarre is the situation you have some twit CEO of Maple Leaf Foods unleashing blaming Trump for the actions of Iran.

Derp: Hit And Derp

Once again, the media hyped up a story in hopes or riling up the public when there was never a need to.

Governor Northam (yes, blackface and the guy who I believe supports infanticide) declared a national emergency assuming the people protesting were violent.

And notice how peaceful it was. Why? Well, Antifa (those loose collection of violent, thugs, commies and losers) weren't there to spark mayhem like they did in Charlottesville. It's pretty amazing how that lie continues to persist. You would think people would have investigated it by now and see that the story wasn't as depicted by the media. From Trump's speech to the turn of events.

And what does Northam do? Applaud the protestors for their civility? Nope. Doubles downs and claims he de-esculated what could have been a 'volatile' situation. Christ, what an asshole.

I'm glad people recognized he was the threat by panicking and presiding people to be criminals for a lawful protest.

In any event, the protest in defence of the Second Amendment (God bless America) protest in Virginia (where a whopping 85 counties of 95 voted to be 2A Sanctuaries. See? It works two-ways. Where leftist cities became refugee sanctuaries, people mobilized and declared sanctuaries for something they believe in too) went off without an incident. It was peaceful and the protestors (which included immigrants, blacks and members of the LBGTQ community) cleaned up after themselves (just like Tea Party supporters back in the day. Remember how they were treated in the media?).

Now go look up Antifa protests and see all the old people they beat up, pregnant women they terrorize, traffic they hold up, private property they destroy and so on.

Yet, on social media the left made their weak attempts to spark a riot and in one tweet, someone asked how 'these cowards' (can I get a narrows gaze over here for lack of self-awareness?!) were allowed to wear masks! It turns out, it was very cold outside and the police made an exemption to the mask law.

What's bizarre about how Virginia (it's worth noting Virginia is a state with many bureaucrat workers)   officials reacted to the protest assuming the worst 'because gun owners' never show a modicum of concern when they know Antifa is coming to town and they have a demonstrated track record of destruction and violence.

The deep state really hates what it hates.


I've observed during the free trade spat with China that a) people sided unwittingly with China - like they did with Iran (post coming on that) and b) conflated the administration's contention of being 'anti -bad deals' with being 'anti-free trade'. The Trump administration, never explicitly said it was against free trade. It was against 'bad deals' they wanted to re-negotiate.

It's the same thing with immigration. It was purposefully, to me anyway, presented that being against illegal immigration as being the same as being anti--immigrant.

Which is a false dichotomy. You can be for strict immigration laws and for immigration.

Just like you can question climate alarmists and still be concerned and cared for the environment. Incidentally, watch Trump address the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland:

Quite refreshing no?


Note: A polite society is an armed one.

Antifa stayed clear and the cops behaved. If the protestors were so violent why then did it end up anti-climatic?

Think about this and the narratives they weave.

Ask yourself just who are the disingenuous ones exactly?


Let's keep with the narratives.

On a recent episode of Judge Judy, I heard her say (to a defendant), '....the greatest boom market that we've had in decades...'

/Looks up on wikipedia who the current President is.

Yet, the media and Democrats are trying to convince people the economy stinks despite the fact it's clearly doing well. Both objectively and statistically.

So disingenuous is the message, it's hard to believe the average American buys it.


Remember the media narrative after the Puerto Rico disaster was how evil and inhumane Trump was for refusing to send aid? To drive the point home, they plastered on social media hm throwing toilet paper around as if he was spitting on them (sorta like that Time cover with him looking down with contempt on an immigrant child) and other outright lies.

Now we find PR officials were the culprits keeping aid from getting to their own people 'because Trump.' Aaaaand yet another example of projection is revealed.

Bad week fo Alex Cora, eh?

People. Don't be played.

It's all I ask.


Mini-Mike Bloomberg made a strange comment recently..

But first, like it matters, here's my perception based on some of his actions when he was Mayor of NYC. He may have been good for business, but at a social level he was a tyrannical nanny. He let himself believe he knew what was best for people (as we saw with his infamous and idiotic salt bans) and created an image of himself as King Nanny.

And if you think that guy gives two-shits about the poor or regular folk, think again.  He's the sort of guy who hanging out with millionaires is beneath him. So tread carefully before thinking he's the humanist he paints himself to be.

Then there's the whole creepy arrogant thing about him:

'I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in'

I wouldn't be so sure Mike. You can't virtue signal and buy your way into Heaven pal.

Wanna impress me? Go full St. Francis of Assisi and then maybe I'll take your quip seriously. And neither will St. Peter.

Jesus, recall, wasn't a fan of coercion. You love that stuff to force people into habits you deem they must adopt. That's social engineering and Jesus wasn't about that. So sharpen up your plea at the Gates of Heaven because Peter has some questions.

Only a progressive would think so arrogantly to presume because of 'good intentions' they're 'getting into heaven.' The thought never occurs to them what if their good intentions actually harmed people?

Faux-righteousness is deception and Mike better lay off the bull shit.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, that no one should boast.¿ Ephesians 2:8-9"

And then came this to drive the point that Mike puts ideology and policy above good acts by fellow humans. He was incapable of just having the grace to shut the fuck up or at least just saying, 'Hey man, God bless this man. We'll talk about gun control another time'.

Nope. He had to go straight for the talking point.

And this be the man who is going straight into hell? He doesn't think that Peter - before passing off the file to God - will see right through him?

Behold Mike's take on Jack Wilson saving countless lives:

It may be true that someone in the congregation had his own gun and killed the person who murdered two other people, but it’s the job of law enforcement to have guns and to decide when to shoot. You just do not want the average citizen carrying a gun in a crowded place.

Right. Does Mike care when ATF and DEA bust down doors with flimsy warrants signed off by sloppy judges go around busting doors and killing innocent people based on the utterly immoral war on drugs?

Mike. You need to go to Church more and calibrate your conscience and bring it in line with your soul.

Assuming you have one.

As for Wilson, President Trump should decorate him with a medal. Wilson is probably ahead of Mike  in the line into Heaven.


Did anyone notice a Bernie staffer calling for violence and talking positively of gulags?

And don't give me none of that 'it was one guy' shit. These people are socialists. This is what socialism and communism (essentially the same crap) think and believe. If they can't convince people, they will violently compel them to do so. It's in the DNA of a leftist. Always was, and always will be.

It's worth noting, Bernie is a pure communist having been part of their world for decades.

They don't believe in liberty and you're a fool and useful idiot if you delude yourself into thinking otherwise.

Take a lefty at face value. If they say they like gulags, it means they do.


And speaking of left-wing, the impeachment of Donald Trump begins today and I fully expect the clowns in the Democrat party pushing this unnecessary charade upon the nation to make a mockery of the entire political process.

There is no legit justification for taking the county down this path and I hope the Democrats will rue the day. All they'll accomplish is deepening the divide.

Meanwhile, where the number of people under Obama exploded, Trump is reducing it.

Never mind the economy is humming along nicely for all Americans.

Meanwhile, the Bidens....


Know what? I'm gonna say it first. California is a danger to North America.

They've lost their fucken minds. They're acting worse than creationists in their anti-science behaviour.

Add that in San Francisco its DA is a cold-hard commie (look up Chesa Boudin's background) purposefully setting up class warfare, you have a toxic mix brewing in that state.

I get it Californians. You live in paradise and are too cool to care but you'd better care. And for those states taking in fleeing Californians, keep them and their bad progressive ideas in check because they'll ruin whatever good thing you have going.



And now an antidote to the derp. I appreciate Prager U putting out material like this:


Tribute To Neil Peart - And Rush

The news of Neil Peart's passing wasn't the first post to open 2020 but sometimes life throws a nasty curve ball. I will discuss Iran in a next post.

The Peart was a great  percussionist and drummer with an immeasurable impact and influence on music fans is an under statement. A professional musician who relentlessly practiced to master his craft and instrument. Rush as a band were tireless in their work ethic.

Worth ethic. That's all it is kids. No one is to blame if you don't get the lot you feel you deserve which is all the rage these days. I'm not digging the zeitgeist.

He was also a well-read, thoughtful pontificator of life, history, and philosophy which took an even more esoteric turn after the death of his daughter killed in a car crash aged 19 and soon after his wife to cancer.

Peart was part of the Triumvirate along with Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson that formed the iconic Canadian progressive metal band Rush.

Basically, Peart and Rush were the sort of guys that left you with a distinct 'wtf? did I just hear?' feeling. I'm happy I got to see them live once and witnessed first hand Peart's legendary drum solos. My buddies are 'Rushheads' (and therefore much more invested in the band than I was) and a few of them saw them five or six times in concert.

And what a concert they gave! What struck me was the sheer power and proficient command of their instruments three guys could produce. It was impressive.

As if his drumming wasn't freakishly stunning on its own, he was also the lyricist (accompanied with strong libertarian/Objectivist overtones. He was apparently a reader of Ayn Rand. Unfortunately, he wavered from this point and took a more left-wing view while in California) to Rush's music and compositions. They also sent a cease and desist letter to Rand Paul for using their music. Their lawyer has said this was for copyright issues. So it's safe to say he swayed a little. No one is perfect.

Peart without a doubt leaves a gigantic gaping hole in the music world with his passing. Many artists have offered their condolences. When Brian Wilson takes the time time to do so you know you were respected.  Peart considered, like many music aficionados, Pet Sounds one of the great rock albums in history.

Not too long ago, Bowie and Petty - among a few others - left at fairly young ages. Peart too left at the age of 67 thanks to brain cancer. For Canadian rock fans, this is a second icon to pass since Gordie Downie of The Tragically Hip.

But....he will live forever like all great artists in the past, through his work and art.

Thanks Rush. You made a lot of people happy and the fact you're revered and often mention in pop culture from South Park to Trailer Park Boys only solidifies this fact.

And now let's take a look at some memorable moments. For more, just go to YouTube (there's footage of him performing a solo live on Letterman) and see the outpouring of emotion for Peart. Name the genre or band and their fans all salute and respect this obscure phenomena we call Rush.

My favourite Rush song:

To get a sense of his talent:

Another. In addition to Ginger Baker, John Bonham and Keith Moon, Gene Krupa and Buddy Rich in jazz were great influencers:

One of the all-time great intros to a timeless rock anthem. Always remember kids, 'his mind was not for rent for god of government'. Think that up the asses of statists.


Dave Grohl of the Foo Fighters inducts Rush into the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame. A joke of a place for waiting so long to induct them if you ask me. But not as big of a joke as Rolling Stone and their bull shit left-wing narratives and cocksucking for Democrat politicians. See Tom Sawyer lyrics.

Even in conservative circles his passing was not missed. Including this article from The American Conservative.