Drain the swamp? Meet the refill.



Darline Nordone’s rise in South Carolina threatens to turn one of MAGA's founding promises into a punch line. The movement that vowed to "drain the swamp" is now watching establishment money, inherited political machinery, and a presidential endorsement converge behind the sister of one of the Senate's most durable establishment figures.

It also risks making Republicans look ridiculous as they denounce the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Democrats will use this cartoonish spectacle to argue that the Republican Party has been captured by corporate interests and turned its back on ordinary Americans.

Nordone (recently rebranded as Darline Graham) remains something of a political blank slate. Beyond the relationship with her late brother Lindsey, her support for a pro-abortion political ally, her years in state bureaucracies, and her association with diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, voters have relatively little record from which to judge what she would actually do in the Senate.

Her refusal to state clearly what she is for and against only deepens the uncertainty.

What voters can reasonably expect, however, is continuity with the Graham political brand: Lindsey Graham's fanatical interventionist foreign policy, establishment instincts at home, and comfort with bipartisan deals that many MAGA voters spent the past decade rejecting.

That is precisely what the MAGA movement was supposed to oppose. We do not need to consult America’s founders to remember why. We need only go back to 2015, when candidate Donald Trump declared war on the political establishment and won by promising to change it.

Obviously, the call to “drain the swamp” reigns supreme in setting the frame, but there is an embarrassment of riches in terms of quotes to choose from to make the point even more specifically. How about at the first Republican debate in 2015:

I will tell you that our system is broken. ... I give to everybody. When they call, I give. And you know what? When I need something from them, two years later, three years later, I call them. They are there for me. ... And that’s a broken system.

How about candidate Trump on Hillary Clinton:

These interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit. Big business, elite media, and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place. They are throwing money at her because they have total control over everything she does. She is their puppet, and they pull the strings.

And what about the special interest support of failed military interventions supported by his then-opponent Senator Lindsey Graham:

Judging by the incompetent way he ran his campaign, it is easy to see why his military strategies have failed so badly — we can’t even beat ISIS!

That is the political movement I signed up for, volunteered for, worked for, and still fight for.

RELATED: ‘Birthright senatorship’ betrays America First

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

How can that movement be squared with an extension of establishment politics rather than its replacement? It can't. Everything Trump once condemned is now reappearing in almost cartoonish form.

So who is spending so heavily to support Darline Graham Nordone — and what do those interests expect in return?

A group called the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition is flooding money to support Darline Graham Nordone against her conservative opponent Ralph Norman. The group has announced $1 million in the race, as part of a $15 million larger pledge across the country, having already spent millions to defeat conservatives Chip Roy and Andy Ogles in their primary races.

The group is a super PAC, made possible by the 2010 Citizens United decision and its progeny, and funded by "clean energy" interests that favor government support for their industry. Conservatives have spent years attacking that kind of arrangement as corporate welfare — or, less politely, socialism. The point is not that every donor buys a politician outright. It is that political money is rarely charitable. Donors spend because policy matters to them.

Darline Graham Nordone has also received support from the establishment Senate campaign arm, the National Republican Senatorial Committee. While she can’t take over her late brother's campaign account directly, it can be transferred to the NRSC, which is funding her already. Notably, her opponent, Ralph Norman, is an original co-sponsor of the Save America Act from six years ago. For an establishment Senate already twisted into knots over its obstruction of that critical legislation, it makes sense that they wouldn’t want another fierce advocate for it.

There are others in this one-sided spending race as well. The Security is our Strength PAC, formerly associated with Lindsey Graham, is of course supporting her to the tune of $900,000. This group makes it clear that it views her as the one who will be “carrying the legacy forward.”

I take it from their perspective that they want the same out of this Graham that they got out of the last one, which is a different political tune than others suggesting that Darline may be more focused domestically. There is also a group called Palmetto Action that is coming in north of $1 million to oppose Ralph Norman, on similar lines.

RELATED: The Biden autopen scandal has one big winner: Anthony Fauci

Alex WROBLEWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

Put simply, a great deal of money is flooding into South Carolina, and most of it is either supporting Darline Graham Nordone or opposing Ralph Norman. For a movement built around draining the swamp, the optics could hardly be worse.

South Carolinians should brace for a deluge of ads from every screen and speaker they own. Special-interest money can move votes; that is why people spend it. But the underlying question will remain: Why is Darline Graham Nordone a serious contender for this Senate seat? Her birthright senatorship via a famous last name, President Trump's endorsement, and a flood of outside money are doing much of the work.

South Carolinians should see this for what it is: a rejection of one of MAGA's core promises. This is not draining the swamp. It is restocking it.

Democrats will happily use this cartoonish spectacle to argue that the Republican Party has been captured by corporate interests and turned its back on ordinary Americans. They will also have an easy answer when Republicans denounce democratic socialism: Why should voters take that charge seriously if a Republican senator reaches office with the help of interests seeking to socialize the costs of private investment?

That will be a tough charge to rebut.

Parents, not bureaucrats, should call the shots



President Trump signed an executive order last week reducing the number of recommended childhood vaccines from 18 to 11 and urging states with school-entry requirements to update their laws accordingly.

That should be a starting point, not an end point.

More coercion will deepen skepticism, not cure it.

Alabama is already closer to that model than most states. Its school-entry requirements rely on a narrower set of core vaccines and do not force hepatitis B vaccination for every student. Other states should treat the president’s order as the floor for vaccine freedom, not the ceiling.

The most immediate step is obvious: States can reduce school-entry requirements to match the new federal recommendations. Better still, they should eliminate those mandates altogether or, at minimum, make it much easier for families to opt out.

Coercion has no place in parental medical decisions. Public schools exist to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic. They should not condition access to a publicly funded classroom on a government-approved medical regimen.

Aligning state rules with the new federal baseline would be progress. But true parental authority requires going farther.

Forty-six states already allow religious exemptions from school vaccine requirements. Their broad existence also shows that states can preserve opt-outs without schools simply ceasing to function.

Religious exemptions should remain. But the principle should not end there.

Parents can have sincere nonreligious reasons for declining particular vaccines, whether because of personal medical history, concerns about a specific product, or objections to the schedule itself. Treating religious objections as legitimate while dismissing every other conscientious objection draws an arbitrary line.

States should therefore expand personal and philosophical exemptions as well. Families should not have to choose between access to public education and surrendering authority over their children’s medical decisions.

Idaho has already gone farther. Its Medical Freedom Act prohibits schools from imposing medical intervention mandates, including vaccine requirements, as a condition of attendance. Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo is pushing in the same direction, seeking to eliminate school vaccine mandates entirely in the Sunshine State.

Other lawmakers should study those models. The core principle is straightforward: Attending a government school should not require surrendering parental authority over a child’s body.

The burden of vaccine mandates also falls unevenly.

Affluent parents who object can more easily homeschool or move a child to a private school with different policies. Working families often have fewer options. They may be forced to comply, navigate exemption processes that demand time and paperwork they do not have, or keep a child out of the classroom.

RELATED: Fauci is yesterday’s fight. Medical freedom is today’s.

Adam Glanzman/Bloomberg/Getty Images

That creates a two-tier system in which families with the fewest resources have the least room to exercise meaningful choice.

Reducing mandates or broadening opt-outs would expand educational freedom precisely for the families who are most constrained by the current system.

None of this prevents families from vaccinating their children. Parents who want the full schedule remain free to choose it. The question is whether the state should force that choice on everyone else as the price of attending school.

Public trust in health institutions fell sharply after COVID. Rebuilding that trust will require transparent information, honest risk communication, and genuine freedom to say no. More coercion will deepen skepticism, not cure it.

President Trump’s executive order gives states a practical starting point.

Legislatures should use it: Reduce school-entry vaccine mandates to the new federal baseline, expand opt-outs beyond religious grounds, or eliminate the mandates entirely.

Parents, not bureaucrats, should decide what goes into their children’s bodies. States that move first can expand educational freedom while beginning the harder work of rebuilding public confidence through voluntary cooperation rather than compulsion.

Yes, Democrats Just Passed A Resolution Seeking To Abolish ICE

The latest act by Democrats proving that once again November’s midterm elections come down to the sane versus the insane.

‘Birthright senatorship’ betrays America First



A few weeks ago, Americans celebrated the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence — our formal rejection of hereditary rule and political power by birthright.

Now South Carolina Republicans are being asked to embrace precisely that principle in a Senate primary.

South Carolina does not need another half-century of political inheritance. It needs a genuine changing of the guard.

After initially saying Darline Graham Nordone would hold her late brother Lindsey Graham’s U.S. Senate seat only temporarily while the state prepared for a special election, President Trump encouraged her to seek a full six-year term. She agreed.

This candidacy began with a promise that proved disposable. A lie. Nothing about it has improved since.

Nordone’s central qualification is obvious: She is Lindsey Graham’s sister. Her campaign amounts to “birthright senatorship” — an inherited claim on public office dressed up as party unity.

America First voters were promised an assault on the swamp: entrenched power, donor networks, insider dealing, and political advancement based on access rather than merit. They were not promised a new hereditary class with Senate seats passed from one family member to another.

To borrow Graham’s own words from the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation fight, this is a sham, and South Carolinians should see through the charade.

Graham’s speech during that battle was one of his finest moments in the Senate. It may have helped save Kavanaugh’s nomination. It did not create a family title to the office Graham held.

His sister is not entitled to inherit his seat because he died in office.

The proposed Graham dynasty is especially offensive because this seat has already been dominated by two men since 1956: Strom Thurmond and Lindsey Graham. South Carolina does not need another half-century of political inheritance. It needs a genuine changing of the guard.

Most voters cannot leave their children a lucrative career, much less a seat in the United States Senate. Public office is not family property. It belongs to the people, who are supposed to choose among candidates with records, ideas, and qualifications of their own.

Nordone has no meaningful public record in politics or policy that would justify elevation to one of the nation’s most powerful offices. What fills that void instead is support for diversity, equity, and inclusion programs; a career inside federally subsidized state bureaucracy; and an endorsement from Rep. Jim Clyburn, the South Carolina Democrat whose support revived Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign.

RELATED: The internet makes monsters and saints before the body is cold

Blaze Media Illustration

None of that recommends her to voters who were told they were dismantling the old order.

For years, South Carolina politics has been dominated by the Haley-Graham cocktail circuit: polished Republicans who chased dragons abroad while much of their state declined beyond the comfortable enclaves of Charleston and Columbia.

Graham’s death was tragic. His foreign-policy views were often badly out of step with America First voters, but no decent person wished for his sudden passing. He deserves mourning and respect.

His sister does not deserve a coronation.

The Republican Party should be especially wary of this arrangement because its voters have spent a decade rebelling against political dynasties. They rejected the Bushes, resisted the Clintons, and rallied behind Trump in part because he attacked a system in which the right surname, donor list, or social circle mattered more than accountability.

A Truth Social post should not be enough to transform blood relation into political legitimacy. Neither should the swift organization of party officials, donors, and consultants eager to preserve their access.

If Nordone wants the seat, she should earn it on the strength of her own record and convictions. So far, she has offered neither. Her campaign asks voters to treat kinship as qualification and temporary appointment as entitlement.

That is the political world America First was supposed to destroy.

South Carolina Republicans should refuse to build a Graham dynasty in the name of draining the swamp. They should reject birthright senatorship and choose a senator rather than accept an heir.

J.D. And Usha Vance Welcome A New Baby Into The Vice Presidential Family

Vance has been at the forefront of a pro-kids campaign for years, and he and his wife are taking their own advice.

‘Protecting Life Should Never Have An Expiration Date’: Pro-Life Org Protests Renewed Federal Funding Of Abortion

Pro-life coalitions and Congress members gather to say there is 'no good excuse' for resuming federal funding to the abortion mega-provider.