At least she can follow a logical path. Maybe she could come and give some insight about this to our current federal government.

About Charles, the French one, you're gonna have a hard time finding someone here considering his speech a "gaffe". Federalists (the whole of Canada and some Quebecers) are totally convinced he did it on purpose. For them it wasn't a gaffe, it was a deliberate affront. The others (non-federalists or soft federalists) either think he did it on purpose (to support independence) or was totally disconnected from reality and thought he was still in New France, thas is carried away by the thousands lining the 250 Km road on the trip he made in an open limo between Quebec City and Montreal, on what is still called today, after nearly 400 years, "Le Chemin du Roy". One way or the other, neither gives a damn about what Ottawa thought about it. It's a (repeated) mistake to presume that Quebecers who are not independentists are necessarily Canadian first, as per identity goes. And whether Charles did it on purpose or not, the French didn't give a damn either because France didn't need Canada between the conquest of 1759, when they dumped us, and Charles' visit in 1967, when they rediscovered our existence, and doesn't desperately need Canada now either. They also know that Canada will never lift a finger that would put in jeopardy the high-tech jobs the French create here. So it's all bravado talk. In fact, the only ones here giving any big importance to that speech are the two extremes on the federalist/separatist spectrum. In between, people couldn't care less. Besides, the majority of our populations wasn't even born in 67, let alone born in Canada.

Anyways, it's all academic. The grand scheme of the British to get rid of us, culturally, set forth in the Union Act of 1840, is progessing rapidly these last years. Louisiana here we come!

My assessment also.