A few years ago, yes, you were right...June 27 2009 at 8:24 PM | David Cornsilk (no login) |
Response to sovereignty |
| Keeler, being concerned for the welfare of the full bloods, always included them; perhaps because the only people then identified as Indians were those of 1/4 blood or higher. Swimmer, being handed a government and tribal population dominated by full bloods always included them. On a trip to Stilwell for a meeting with Swimmer, I heard him say, "I only let Leo Fishinghawk on my ticket because he has an Indian name and that gets votes." Mankiller, being more closely aligned with full bloods, included them. I'm sure sure each chief could give you their reasoning, but for the most part, the tribe was held together by higher degree of blood Cherokees and the leadership cowtowed to it to some degree or another. It was not until the middle of the Mankiller term that the balance of power shifted and the tribal population again became dominated by thin bloods. With each new council after 1995 the CNO became whiter and whiter. The current council is overwhelmed by thin bloods. For the first time in the history of the CNO there is not one single full blood or Cherokee speaker on the council. There is no longer any need for them to find that full blood to parade around the Cookson Hills, the domination of the CNO by whites with thin strains of Cherokee blood is complete. Thus, the need for the UKB. |
|