The argument made, to defend Obama against claims that he is a radical, is that his association with radicals does not mean he, himself, was or is a radical. Stanley Kurtz's research in the Annenberg CAC filesnow proves that Obama was, indeed, a radical. He was not a bomb-throwing outlaw revolutionary, like his friend, colleague, and partner, Ayers, but he was a radical in the mold of the establishment radical. Establishment radicals live in the elite, but use their position and power to advance radical agendas that would undermine traditional elites. The model is provided by the fascists in the British aristocracy and the pacifists and socialists in British academia. (The model flows out of the Marxist split between revolutionary socialism and evolutionary socialism, the latter which would use legitimate political processes to advance socialism.) Conventionally, radicals in the Marxist stream, like Obama, act in the name of oppressed peoples. It is now clear that is exactly what Obama did in the CAC grants. The grants also had the positive benefit of building up a base of political support in the Leftist, radical district in which Obama eventually ran for office. As I said before, Obama is the most radical, major presidential candidate since Eugene Debs, of the Socialist Party of America, in 1912.