In this paper, the author describes the reactions and review of two reporters who attended the opening of the National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) in 2004. One reporter, Marc Fisher, said "The museum feels like a trade show in which each group of Indians gets space to sell its founding myth and favorite anecdotes of survival." Another, Paul Richard, began his museum review with a critique of curators for exhibits that he described as confusing and unclearly marked. This author contends that the NMAI's decision to challenge traditional museum modes of exhibition is political in that the outcome confronts stereotypes created by museums and other knowledge-producing institutions. More often than not, Indigenous peoples have not recognized themselves in "traditional" museum exhibits because the displays have overlooked or concealed their realities. The NMAIA and NAGPRA have empowered tribal nations to dislocate and relocate themselves away from museums' colonialist tendencies by scrutinizing the process of annihilation inherent in "traditional" exhibits and freeing themselves from outsider representations and interpretations. Therefore, the NMAI should be read as a testament to Indians' ability to adapt and change yet remain true to the core values of their tribal nations regardless of change. Achieving museological liberation and working against established structures, practices, and images by substituting them with Indigenous models is a decision that has the potential to destabilize and dislocate its majority audience as evidenced by Fisher's and Richard's responses. (Contains 29 endnotes.)