It was another week in the life of Lindsey Graham (R-No Man's Land). 
 
 On Monday, Sen. James Inhofe said his Republican colleague from South Carolina had "chosen to ignore" the American people and was making a deal with President Obama that would increase the "risk of terrorist activity." 
 
 On Tuesday, the conservative Web site Redstate.com branded Graham a "RINO" (Republican in Name Only), not to mention a "cretin" and "a poster child for everything that is anathema to conservative Republicans." 
 
 Wednesday, it was Glenn Beck's turn to pick on the senator. "You read his stuff, it's like reading Obama's campaign speech," the Fox News host said. 
 
 Finally, on Thursday, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (Mich.), ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee, accused Graham and Obama in a New York Post op-ed of a "deal with the devil" and said Graham "hasn't thought this through." 
 
 After a week like that, most of Graham's colleagues would feel as though they'd lost a tickle fight to Eric Massa. But Graham has heard it all before. "What drives my train," he told me when I reached him late in the week, "is not their approval; it's getting it right." 
 
 The fact that such a sentiment makes Graham an oddball in the Republican Party, and to some extent Congress generally, says less about him than about his colleagues. For all his supposed heresies -- on climate change, judicial nominees, immigration and now his offer to help close the Guantanamo Bay prison -- Graham had a 2009 rating of 88 percent from the American Conservative Union and a lifetime rating of 90 percent. 
 
 "The people that call me a RINO would call Ronald Reagan a RINO," he protested. "Reagan worked with Tip O'Neill to increase taxes to save Social Security." What's changed is that "purity is replacing principled compromise," he lamented, as ideology enforcers in both parties threaten primary challenges against those who stray. 
 
 Though Graham doesn't have to face primary voters until 2014, his defiance of the GOP purity police is still courageous. His Republican colleagues in Congress, wetting their pants out of fear of the tea party movement, show no sign of joining him. 
 
 But Graham's latest offer should still be taken seriously by Obama's White House, which needs a way to recover from its self-inflicted wounds over Gitmo. Obama goofed twice, missing his deadline for closing the prison and then making the ruinous choice to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a criminal trial in New York. 
 
 This took an eight-year-old dispute to a new level of rage. On one side, there's now Liz Cheney's absurd accusation that Justice Department lawyers are al-Qaeda sympathizers. On the other side is the ACLU, which, in demanding civilian trials for 9/11 conspirators, ran an ad morphing Obama's face into George W. Bush's. 
 
 Graham has provided Obama a way out of this standoff: Send KSM to a military tribunal in exchange for Congress abandoning legislation that would deny funding to close Gitmo. Next, the administration would work with Congress to create a "national security court," which would govern how other current and future terrorism suspects can be held in preventive detention. 
 
 Bush and his unitary executive theory lawyers rejected this approach on grounds that it would interfere with presidential authority. Obama was open to the idea last year, before some on the left pushed back, opposing any legislation that would justify detention. But the ideological purists on both sides need to compromise. As Benjamin Wittes and his Brookings Institution colleagues point out, the system is a huge mess, with federal judges making up rules as they go along in a haphazard legal framework. 
 
 It will take some courage for Obama to defy his liberal base -- but nothing like the courage Graham will need to take on the Republican purity enforcers. "I'd be glad to argue with my colleagues in the Republican Party about the problems with Guantanamo Bay," he boasted. 
 
 That's the sort of talk that won Graham censures from GOP leadership in two South Carolina counties. He reasons that he "could stay in this job forever" by telling GOP primary voters what they want to hear. But he took a different route. "I'm not job-scared," he told me, because it has come to the point where "fear stops you from acting in the best interests of the country." 
 
 Of course, Graham wouldn't mind some company in his heresy. "I'd encourage my colleagues to do what's rational and not act out of fear," he said. Most Republicans are too job-scared to join him, but there's still hope for Obama. 
 
 The writer will be online to chat with readers at 1 p.m. on Monday. Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion. ||||| — Nancy Mace, the first woman to graduate from The Citadel, and state Sen. Lee Bright, one of the Legislatures more outspoken libertarians, say they will announce soon that they will run against U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham in next years Republican primary. 
 
 The two challengers would join Richard Cash, an Easley businessman who lost a 2010 Republican congressional runoff, in trying to block Graham from winning a third six-year term in the Senate. 
 
 However, a large field of libertarian opponents could help Graham by splintering Tea Party voters among his challengers, S.C. political scientists said. If Im Lindsey Graham, I want two or three people opposing me, Citadel political scientist Scott Buchanan said. 
 
 On her website, Mace said Thursday that she plans to make her announcement at 9 a.m. Saturday at a GOP breakfast in her hometown of Goose Creek. 
 
 Mace, who runs a Charleston public relations agency that has done political work, said she would talk about her campaign then. The 35-year-old political newcomer has said for months that she was mulling a run against Graham. The Seneca Republican has been targeted by Tea Party followers because, they say, of his willingness to compromise with Democrats on some issues. 
 
 Bright, a 43-year-old Spartanburg County truck company owner, said Thursday he plans to enter the race within the next few weeks. 
 
 Bright said he was waiting to see if either U.S. Reps. Trey Gowdy, R-Spartanburg, or Jeff Duncan, R-Laurens, enter the GOP primary against Graham. The congressmen have not announced any plans to challenge Graham, whom Bright said is too willing to allow government to intrude into private lives. 
 
 Unlike Mace, Bright said he has a voting record that voters can use to judge his commitment to limited government. In 2011, for instance, Bright introduced a bill to study creating a S.C. currency in case the federal government fell into financial ruin. 
 
 My having a record in the state Senate similar to the record of (former U.S. Sen.) Jim DeMint had in the U.S. Senate would be appealing to South Carolinians, Bright said. 
 
 Cash, 53, said the additional candidates will bring more interest into the race. He said he is not just running against Graham but wants to share his positive message of hope and heritage. 
 
 The Graham campaign declined comment until the candidates formally announce they are running. 
 
 With only 10 months before the June 2014 primary, Mace, Bright and Cash need to raise lots of cash fast to have a chance of overcoming the $6.3 million that the Graham campaign has on hand. 
 
 Grahams supporters also have started a super PAC to support his re-election bid. An anti-Graham political organization also was formed last month to defeat the 58-year-old senator. 
 
 Bright said he thinks he can raise the $5 million necessary to run a competitive campaign. 
 
 Some money could come from outside the state, such as from the Club for Growth, said Mark Tomkins, a University of South Carolina political scientist. 
 
 Do the Koch brothers come in? Tomkins said of the influential Midwestern businessmen known for backing conservative candidates. Im not sure they are not pleased with Graham. Theres a lot of money out there none of us know about. 
 
 Mace faces a tough challenge in going up against Graham, a seasoned politician, The Citadels Buchanan said. However, a good showing  winning about 40 percent of the primary vote  could propel her to another future office, such as the state Legislature. 
 
 Theres something to said for going through the gauntlet, Buchanan said. Shes aiming high on this one. 
 
 Bright will run a very aggressive campaign, experts said. 
 
 He is the in-your-face, red-meat conservative who will play real well with voters who are critical of Lindsey, Buchanan said. 
 
 But Tompkins said a Bright candidacy could anger libertarians who prefer Mace, popular in some circles because she broke the gender barrier at South Carolinas previously all-male military college. 
 
 He doesnt offer a story that can attract coverage the way Nancy Mace does, Tompkins said of Bright. With lots of time to go, I would expect conservatives to work hard to come behind a single candidate  and she may be better positioned than he is to take advantage of that effort. 
 
 Political analysts also said Grahams positions on some issues have grown more conservative as his 2014 re-election drew closer. For instance, Graham has launched several attacks against the Obama administration for its handling of the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. 
 
 Hes trying to cover his flank on the right side, Buchanan said of Graham. 
 
 Even if he wins re-election, a hard-fought GOP primary could send a message to Graham. It puts pressure to be less cooperative and (not) sign on to those grand bargains with Democrats, Tompkins said. 
 
 CORRECTION: This story was updated to reflect Lindsey Graham's correct number of terms in the Senate. ||||| Sen. Ted Cruz speaks with his wife, Heidi, by his side during a primary night campaign event in Indianapolis. Cruz ended his presidential campaign, eliminating the biggest impediment to Donald Trump’s march to the Republican nomination. 
 
 May 3, 2016 Sen. Ted Cruz speaks with his wife, Heidi, by his side during a primary night campaign event in Indianapolis. Cruz ended his presidential campaign, eliminating the biggest impediment to Donald Trump’s march to the Republican nomination. Darron Cummings/AP 
 
 Who’s afraid of big, bad Ted Cruz? 
 
 Not Lamar Alexander. The Tennessee Republican went on the Senate floor to accuse his fellow Republican of proposing actions that would “render ourselves lawless” and cause “chaos.” Alexander reminded the Texan that the Senate “requires restraint and goodwill.” 
 
 Not John Cornyn. The senior senator from Texas said that Cruz’s prescription would be a “terrible mistake” and that if his fellow Texas Republican were making a valid point, “you would find other voices joining that of the junior senator, but I hear no one.” 
 
 And certainly not Orrin Hatch. The Utah Republican and Senate president pro tempore said on the Senate floor, in remarks prompted by Cruz, that “squabbling and sanctimony” won’t be tolerated. 
 
 “The Senate floor has too often become a forum for partisan messaging,” the veteran legislator inveighed. “It has been misused as a tool to advance personal ambitions, a venue to promote political campaigns and even a vehicle to enhance fundraising efforts” — all of which Cruz has done. “Most egregiously, Mr. President, the Senate floor has even become a place where senators have singled out colleagues by name to attack them in personal terms.” 
 
 On the Senate floor July 24, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) accused "career politicians" in Congress of "looting the tax payer to benefit wealthy, powerful corporations." (AP) 
 
 [Five myths about Ted Cruz] 
 
 Finally, Senate Republicans are standing up to the bully who terrorized them the past two and a half years — and they’re finding out he isn’t so tough, after all. After Cruz on the Senate floor Friday called his fellow Republican, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), a liar, his GOP colleagues have moved swiftly to shut down his antics. They voted in large numbers to renew the Export-Import Bank (McConnell’s scheduling of the vote, opposed by Cruz, is what prompted Cruz to accuse McConnell of lying) and they thwarted Cruz and his sidekick, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), on poison-pill amendments to the highway bill that would have jettisoned Senate rules in order to defund Planned Parenthood, scuttle the Iran nuclear deal and repeal Obamacare. 
 
 In a particular humiliation of Cruz, he was unable to get a “sufficient second” for a vote on his Iran amendment Sunday, persuading just three senators — well short of the 20 percent he needed. Such seconds are routinely granted as a courtesy, and longtime Congress watchers couldn’t recall a similar rebuke by senators of a colleague. 
 
 [The GOP Congress is set to run off the rails] 
 
 Off the floor, other GOP senators — Mike Rounds (S.D.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Susan Collins (Maine), Thom Tillis (N.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.) — piled on with their own criticism of Cruz. 
 
 McConnell called a meeting of all GOP senators Monday night at which each senator was given an intercepted copy of an e-mail from Lee’s office encouraging outside conservative groups to pressure rank-and-file senators to oppose Republican Senate leaders. Lee apologized, blaming a staffer, and surrendered without a fight in his quest for an Obamacare-repeal amendment to the highway bill. 
 
 This could be a turning point for Republicans, if they come to the conclusion that Cruz and his ilk are paper tigers. Cruz has found scant support on the presidential primary trail; polling under 6 percent, he’s in a tie for seventh place and is registering less than a third the support Donald Trump has and less than half that of Jeb Bush. 
 
 In a broader sense, Republican senators seem to be growing in confidence that they can defy what remains of the tea party and affiliated conservative groups such as Heritage Action and Club for Growth. Not a single Republican senator was defeated in a primary last year, and none but McCain so far faces a real challenge next year. 
 
 Any celebration should be restrained, because the House remains in the grips of Cruz-like conservatives. House Republican leaders said Tuesday they would leave early for their August recess rather than take up the highway bill after it clears the Senate. 
 
 But McConnell seemed uncharacteristically cheerful as he opened the Senate on Tuesday morning. He smiled at a page. He smiled at Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). He shared a smile and a chuckle with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). 
 
 “The Senate continues to move closer and closer to passage of a bipartisan multi-year highway bill,” McConnell said, already beginning his thank-yous even though the bill was scheduled for a final vote Wednesday. 
 
 Minutes later, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a reliable conservative, went to the floor to move up the vote on the bill. “I’m going to make an appeal for whoever is trying to string this thing out to shorten the time so we can have the vote,” he said, in an obvious reference to Cruz. “Now, whether the individuals have placed themselves in the corner where that’s not going to happen, I don’t know.” 
 
 The bully has indeed been cornered, and from here he doesn’t look so menacing. 
 
 Twitter: @Milbank 
 
 Read more from Dana Milbank’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.
– After offering a Gitmo compromise to President Obama, Lindsey Graham got called everything from a "cretin" to someone making a "deal with the devil" this week by his fellow Republicans. That's just business as usual for Graham, whose designation may as well be "R-No Man's Land," writes Dana Milbank. Graham seems genuinely concerned with getting things right than with blindly sticking to some ideological purity test, and that, sadly, makes him an "oddball" on Capitol Hill. "Though Graham doesn't have to face primary voters until 2014, his defiance of the GOP purity police is still courageous," writes Milbank in the Washington Post. "His Republican colleagues in Congress, wetting their pants out of fear of the tea party movement, show no sign of joining him."