Ampersand takes up the debate I pointed to earlier (the discussion between Hesiod and Atrios about what to do next with the Lott matter). Ampersand does an excellent job of both summarizing what has gone before and putting forth a point of view that does not call into question the motives of those who may disagree. I was pretty much of the same mind as Hesiod on this issue when I first read his post. I think the Democrats need to focus on the sheethead-pandering tactics of the Republicans to make it clear that Lott is not an isolated situation but is, instead, indicative of a disease that is destroying a great political party (and our country along with it). But Atrios and Ampersand have helped me to realize that this issue goes beyond simple party politics. Put simply, just because a certain strategy for the future may be the best for the Democratic party does NOT mean that it is the best for Kweisi Mfume and the NAACP. I made the mistake of thinking of the NAACP as an adjunct of the party instead of an equal partner and it is that which I think caused Atrios to have such a negative reaction. Mfume is looking out for what is best for the people he represents and should be applauded for it. The fact that part of his focus may not be the most beneficial for the Democratic party should not play into it (unless he decides that, for the moment, what is the best for the Dems is the best for the NAACP).