Sorry for the delay. I think it is done and back as before. You can begin to post again. Let me know if you see anything that isn't as it should be.

We came to Cherokee with the intention that Anne would work at the Cherokee Hospital, which is owned and operated by the Cherokee Indian Hospital Authority, a creation of the Eastern Band Cherokee Indians, recognized as an Indian Nation by the federal government.

We arrived curious about the status of the Cherokee in Carolina, how the people were doing, the condition of the tribal organization, and most of all, why there remained Cherokee in North Carolina after passage of the Indian Removal Act of about 1840.

We have found that the people are doing fine, at least many of them are. Although perhaps the most “Americanized” of Indians in the early 1800’s, the people of Cherokee are proud to maintain many traditions and the Cherokee language. Otherwise they are simply a clannish community of Carolina mountain folk struggling with life’s usual issues.

How is wealth defined? My daughter thinks we are wealthy because we have savings. Half the world would consider all Americans wealthy from the way we live. A banker might say that wealth is security, but is there real security when war is possible and we all mostly die within a century of our birth?

I felt wealthy this weekend. I have never been impoverished though there were some times in my youth when loneliness made me feel empty. Still, I was more unhappy than impoverished. I certainly did not feel poor as a boy when I could snorkel along the Florida beaches and camp in the pinewoods and Everglades, even though the family budget allowed no high-class entertainment or recreation. I felt wealthy as a young man in love with a job and a new family, even when our balance sheet was in the red.

August 14, 2006. Bob and Cath's hike with Tim. They met Greg and Justin and Chelsea on Gothics before 10:30 am.

Mike running the Cape Cod Brew Run

Lieberman lost....
"His loss to Ned Lamont — just six years after his party made him its vice presidential candidate — made him only the fourth incumbent senator to lose a primary since 1980. But he pledged to petition his way onto the November ballot as an independent candidate."

Notable for why he lost, and the fact that so few incumbents lose primaries.

this is a great site for people who find themselves always listening to the same old music. If you wish there was something fresh to listen to which you also enjoyed try out
www.pandora.com

it's free because it comes with some ads on the side of the page (no audio ads though to interrupt the music!) and it's easy because you just put in an artist you like or even simply one song you like and it starts playing music for you.

if you're familiar with Launchcast from yahoo you'll find it very similar. I like it because it actually plays and works on my Apple computer unlike Launchcast and t

I'm currently finishing up the Tufts Summer Session...one of my classes is Candidates, Campaigns and Elections and a race that we've been talking about throughout the class is Lieberman's primary race.

I've never really been interested in ant elections but the Presidential, but this class and my age, I suppose, have opened me up to a greater sphere of politics.

I find the Connecticut Democratic Primary race between Lieberman and Lamont particularly entertaining. One of the thing's my Professor likes to exclaim is, "It is not what is real that is important but what is perceived to be real." He points out to us (and it seems backed) that Lieberman really should have the advantage as an incumbent. Traditionally Senate incumbents get re-elected. Why Lieberman is being targeted by the Dem party, potentially at the risk of sacrificing a D seat for Senate (by losing the name recognition and incumbent advantage after the primary) is because not only does he believe that the U.S. should stay in Iraq...but that the U.S. was correct to go Iraq and that there were absolutely no errors made in our foreign policy during this war. Conn Dems, however, believe that regardless of whether or not the US should stay in Iraq, that the war is not going "well" and that perhaps some mistakes should be acknowledged. Lieberman stands up for his conscience here and refuses to back down. A debate results: should Conn voters respect Lieberman for standing apart from the Dem pack, for upholding his long-held conviction as it stands, for the Iraq conflict...or should CT Dems punish him for his failure to understand what they believe happened with Iraq?