There are (way too) many folks in the Republican base who don't understand the appeal of Ron Paul, or for that matter, why his supporters refuse to waiver. Well, here's the answer why.

Contra popular "wisdom," not every American is anxious to yield unlimited powers to politicians in the name of whatever scare tactic du jour they wish to spin. In fact, the majority of Americans are not only tired of politics as usual, whereby they surrender their liberty and money without end, but understand quite clearly that indeed, it is Washington, DC itself that represents the single greatest threat to our lives, liberty, property, and way of life.

Ron Paul is the only candidate - Republican or Democratic - who respects the natural rights of man as enshrined in our Bill of Rights. He is the only candidate interested in defending the religious, legal and political achievements man has made over centuries of struggle, that protected the weak from tyrannical government by restraining power.

Today, the U.S. president wields powers unimaginable to King George III himself, while the Congress has proved our Constitution to be a dead letter. The Ruling Class has no intention of curbing the growth of their power either. Power corrupts. Ron Paul's success is a direct rejection of the Big Government attitude that infects both the left and the right in America today, an attitude which gave rise to the debt-ridden, power-hungry federal government we now face.

This is what freeman want. This is why so many Americans support Paul. It's not hard to understand. Not even a little. People, correctly, trust themselves more than they do the corrupt politicians of Washington, DC.

The following is Ron Paul on the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

The NDAA Repeals More Rights

Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed. The 4^th amendment has been rendered toothless by the PATRIOT Act. No more can we truly feel secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects when now there is an exception that fits nearly any excuse for our government to search and seize our property. Of course, the vast majority of Americans may say "I'm not a terrorist, so I have no reason to worry." However, innocent people are wrongly accused all the time. The Bill of Rights is there precisely because the founders wanted to set a very high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured.

The PATRIOT Act, as bad is its violation of the 4^th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly. The main section of concern, Section 1021 of the NDAA Conference Report, does to the 5^th Amendment what the PATRIOT Act does to the 4^th. The 5^th Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning. It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented or access to legal counsel.

The dangers in the NDAA are its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the US government without trial. It is now no longer limited to members of al Qaeda or the Taliban, but anyone accused of "substantially supporting" such groups or "associated forces." How closely associated? And what constitutes "substantial" support? What if it was discovered that someone who committed a terrorist act was once involved with a charity? Or supported a political candidate? Are all donors of that charity or supporters of that candidate now suspect, and subject to indefinite detainment? Is that charity now an associated force?

Additionally, this legislation codifies in law for the first time authority to detain Americans that has to this point only been claimed by President Obama. According to subsection (e) of section 1021, "[n]othing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." This means the president's widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law. That should chill all of us to our cores.

The Bill of Rights has no exemptions for "really bad people" or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the bill of rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire Unites States is a battlefield in the War on Terror. This is a very dangerous development indeed. Beware.