U.S. Government Agencies Stockpiling Ammo

The website businessinsider.com posted the following report today.

"First the DHS needed 450 million rounds of ammunition, then the NOAA requested 46,000 rounds, now we've discovered an online request at FBO.Gov calling for 174,000 rounds of ammunition for the Social Security Administration.

The request actually calls for 174K .357 hollow points that arguably have as much stopping power as any bullet out there, and hollow points do as much damage to soft tissue as possible on top of that.
R.K. Campbel at Gun Blast mentions his experience with .357 rounds:

I observed the effect of the .357 Magnum 125 grain JHP once over the top of my own sights. The effect was gruesome. A solid hit that produced a severe blood flow AND dramatic effect from the rear, including lung tissue thrown perhaps three feet.

The 125 grain and JHP (jacketed rounds) are exactly the ones requested by the SSA and their offices of Inspector General and Investigation.
The FBO has a link that lists all locations slated to receive the batches of bullets. Offices like Greensboro, NC are getting a mere 1,000 rounds while offices like Iselin, NJ are getting 10 times that number.
Alex Jones' InfoWars is quick to point out that this acquisition jibes with a DHS operation in January where the agency swarmed a Leesburg, FL social security office and posted armed guards outside the doors."

Is our government expecting trouble? Is anybody else uncomfortable with the idea of non-law enforcement agencies stockpiling ammunition? It doesn't give me a "warm and fuzzy" feeling.
A few months ago the Washington Post reported that heavily armed special agents of the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Inspector General raided a home in Stockton, CA. While it wasn't a S.W.A.T team as originally reported, the concept of "heavily armed Education Department employees" still leaves a bit unnerved. I think I would have preferred that they turn cases like this over to the FBI.

I guess the next time someone opposed to the 2nd Amendment asks, "Why would an ordinary American citizen need an AK-47?" Maybe one answer might be "Because apparently NOAA and the Social Security Administration have .357 magnums with hollow point ammunition!"  

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-does-the-social-security-administration-need-174000-rounds-of-ammunition-2012-8#ixzz23fcypIYM

Romney Announces Paul Ryan as VP Choice: Democrats Latest New Catch Phrase

THIS IS A CATCH PHRASE/BUZZWORD/SLOGAN ALERT!

Yesterday Mitt Romney announced that he has chosen Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) as his running mate. Over the next several weeks or so there will be a great deal of analysis from both ends of the political spectrum as to the wisdom of this choice. Personally, I think it was a good pick because Ryan is an expert on the federal budget and he will be invaluable to Romney in helping to articulate the difference between the Democrat "Tax the Rich" and "Continue to Spend" approach that has clearly failed and a Republican economic growth agenda. There is a danger of course in choosing Ryan because his budget plan gives the Democrats specific items to attack and snipe at. However, I would argue that having a plan is preferable to President Obama and the liberals' non-plan. Romney will need to stick to the basic tenants of Ryan's budget proposal while demonstrating a willingness to be flexible on the individual parts. Now for the new catch phrase part.

Like Madison Avenue advertising executives trying to find the next CLIO award winning ad slogan, I think I have detected the next Democrat catch phrase attempt - "the Deserving Wealthy." I heard it used in rapid succession by two different panel guests on "This Week with George Stephanopolis." Apparently, the Left's teleconference/phone tree of political hacks, "journalists" and spinmeisters was busy last night or early this morning coordinating the "message" which is just a new twist on the old liberal charge that Republicans are only for the rich. So watch over the next several day as the mainstream media, the Debbie Wasserman Schultz's of the world, and the Obama Administration try to insert "deserving wealthy" everywhere from newspaper stories, TV news casts and prime time shows, commercials, Saturday morning kids cartoons, sports coverage, etc. It should be a hoot but it won't turn around the economy now will it?

In Romney Tax Returns, Democrats Find Their "Birther" Issue ...With One Major Difference

       In their never ending quest to distract the voters from the Obama Administration's dismal performance on the economy, the Democrats have been throwing everything they can at the wall to see if something will stick. The usual suspects - Harry Reid, Nancy Peloci, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Jay Carney, David Axelrod, et al - have been trotted out, hit the Sunday Morning Talk Show circuit and in well rehearsed lines, floated one trial balloon after another to try to find that "Gotcha Issue." A few have gained a bit of traction for a time but ultimately all have failed to deliver. Some topics such as Seamus the Dog and overseas investments outright backfired because the Democrat accusers didn't have enough common sense to do the due diligence to check their own vulnerability on these issues: President Obama had actually eaten dog and most of the accusers had some amount of overseas investments in their portfolios.
       Over the last several weeks, the Democrat mantra has been "Governor Romney release your tax returns." and "If you have nothing to hide, why not just release your tax returns?" In their desperation, they have even gone so far as to accuse Mr. Romney of committing a felony and also not paying any taxes for the last ten years. Absolutely no evidence of course but when Harry Reid tells us "The word is out." that should be enough for us, right? It is for his "associates" back in Vegas. Hearing all this, it began to sound vaguely familiar to me. "Where had I heard this before?" It wasn't until I saw part of an interview with that titan of intellect, Robert Gibbs, that it occurred to me. This sounds like the same argument the "birthers" were making! Gibbs said he couldn't remember anyone refusing to do something so simple and that this is easy enough to settle: just release the tax returns. Once I regained my composure after witnessing Gibbs' apparent acute attack of amnesia, I thought to myself, I bet the Democrats are seeing an equivalence between the two issues. "You demanded to see Barack Obama's birth certificate and we are demanding to see Mitt Romney's tax returns. It's the same thing." Of course, for anyone who has read and understands the Constitution, the difference couldn't be more obvious.