Deletion of Milton Wolf (politician)

Comment: Subject passes .  Of note, this is not Milton Wolf (ambassador) as referenced in http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=gVJIAAAAIBAJ&sjid=-oEMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5777,4032170&dq=milton-wolf&hl=en this article but he appears to be a colunmnist for the Washington Post http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/3/save-america-repeal-obamacare/ WOLF: Save America: Repeal Obamacare, he has been interviewed on Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/03/17/president-cousin-condemns-obamacare/ President's Cousin Condemns Obamacare, and has generated regional news in the Wichita Eagle http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=WE&s_site=kansas&p_multi=WE&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=12F254DF094D7C28&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM Hundreds attend tax day protests in Wichita.  The exposure in the press is reason enough in my view.  If you need more, because the subject seems to be writing op-ed pieces for a large publication that may be considered "controversial" in nature, it would also be worthwhile to maintain the article on the subject should any of his work ever be referenced in other articles on Wikipedia
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Although this is the first time this article has been through the AFD process, it has already survived a both a suggested speedy deletion and proposed deletion.  Just to get it all into the AFD record, I'm tempted to repost the long discussion from the Talk:Milton Wolf (radiologist)|article's talk page of why this article meets the required notability standard of 'significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article,' but I'll spare everyone.  Suffice to say that (i) there are a lot of substantive news stories in reputable publications about this guy; and (ii) he's a regular columnist in a newspaper.  I'll be the first to acknowledge that the reason he's getting this coverage and has this soapbox at the Washington Times has a lot to do with the oddity of a Tea Party conservative being (distantly) related to President Obama, but although notability is not |inherited on WP, the choice of these outlets to feature Wolf is still 'significant coverage...' for purposes of WP notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:INHERITED)

Comment: per the list of  sources in the article talk page. He has achieved separate notability because the press is writing about him separately as a topic of discussion. It's not as if we (Wikipedia) are saying "he's Obama's cousin therefore he's notable", rather it is the press that is saying that - two different things. The INHERIT essay was not meant to trump  and second-guess the press. Normally POLITICIAN would apply since he has not won office, but in this case as Obama's cousin he has additional factors and a lot of sourcing to sway my opinion we should keep for now. It can always be revisited later if nothing new happens
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GNG)