posted July 08, 2009 06:37 PM         

Sarah Palin has deeply disappointed her enemies. People who hate her guts feel she's really let them down by resigning.

She's like the ex-girlfriend they're SO over, never want to see again, have already forgotten about -- really, it's O-ver -- but they just can't stop talking about her.

Liberal: Ha, ha ... Sarah who? She's over, she's toast, a future Trivial Pursuit answer, nothing more.

Normal person: Whatever. How about the North Korean missiles?

Liberal: Can you believe she just resigned the governorship like that? What a quitter!

Normal person: Speaking of quitting, how's work?

Liberal: Did you hear she might get a TV show? There's no way Sarah Palin's getting a TV show! No way! I can't believe stupid Sarah Palin could get her own stupid TV show now. Well, I'm sure not gonna watch it -- that's for sure!

Normal person: Have you seen all the Michael Jackson coverage on TV?

Liberal: How does she think she can run for president in 2012 if she can't finish her term as governor of a Podunk state? She's finished.

Normal person: OK, then! You won't have to vote for her.

Liberal: I was never going to vote for her! But now I'm not going to vote for her twice. And I will never watch her TV show. I am so over her.

Reporters had already written their stories on Palin's press conference -- "rambling!" "incoherent!" -- before she even stepped to the podium.

Whatever you think of Palin, her argument for resigning was the opposite of "rambling" and "incoherent."

Palin's basketball analogy couldn't have been clearer, even to prissy liberal pundits who get uncomfortable when the subject turns to sports: She decided to destroy the other team's game plan, which has been to obsessively focus on her, by resigning.

This is particularly apt here -- she's passing the ball to a fantastic right-wing lieutenant governor, who shares her principles but doesn't set off the left's neuroses.

This is better for him, better for the state, better for the conservative program and better for Palin personally, whose family is sick of all the crap. Now she can make a lot of money and promote conservatism on a national stage.

It certainly won't be held against Palin by people who don't already loathe her. (On the other hand, her approval ratings among people who think she's worse than Hitler are down to 48 percent.)

With the left frenetically filing ethics complaint after ethics complaint against Palin, costing her state millions of dollars and her personally half a million dollars, citizens of Alaska must be asking, "Can we please have our state back?"

But to read the news reports -- which actually were rambling and incoherent -- you would think Palin was speaking in tongues.

The truth is liberals are furious they won't have Sarah Palin to kick around anymore -- at least not with Palin's hands tied behind her back by her public office.

Something tells me Keith Olbermann isn't going to be pulling any big numbers this summer attacking Eric Cantor and Michele Bachmann. I don't anticipate any sudden outbreaks of "Mitch McConnell Derangement Syndrome."

Soon we'll only hear about Keith when his creepy e-mails using his mother's death to hit on chicks start making the rounds again. (Tip to Keith: When a girl refuses to give you her phone number, her assistant's phone number or her personal e-mail address, and only gives you her assistant's e-mail address, you're not halfway in the sack.)

Bonus: If Olbermann gets canceled as a result of Palin's resignation, that will put her in a really good position for 2012.

But instead of being honest and saying, "Oh well, it was a good ride while it lasted," liberal chatterers indignantly demand: "Is this not the greatest betrayal a public servant ever committed against the people?"

On one hand, liberals are enraged at the heinousness of Mark Sanford -- whom they didn't vote for -- for not resigning and, on the other, they're enraged at Palin -- whom they also didn't vote for -- for resigning.

The peculiarly venomous hatred of Palin is driven by women of the left and their whipped consorts. All that needs to happen is for a feminist to overhear two Nation readers saying, "I hate to admit it, but Palin is kind of hot" and ...

WHAT??????????? YOU CALL THAT HOT? I'LL HAVE YOU KNOW WE'VE GOT A MEGA-SUPER HOTTIE IN DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. AND NEED I REMIND YOU AGAIN OF THE RAW SEX APPEAL OF RACHEL MADDOW?

Democrats are a party of women, and nothing drives them off their gourds like a beautiful Christian conservative. (How much money has that other beautiful born-again, Carrie Prejean, been forced to spend on lawyers to respond to liberal hysteria?)

So the motives are clear, but the money is not. Who is paying the rent for the losers filing all these frivolous complaints against Palin?

At least when Richard Mellon Scaife was funding investigations of Bill Clinton, we knew who Scaife was, he was an American citizen, and his money was accessible to U.S. tax authorities and not stashed in offshore accounts like a certain Hungarian Nazi-collaborator,*(George Soros)* I can name.

posted July 18, 2009 12:53 PM         

She's everything they are not...a real person and not a construct personality.

So, it's natural they would attack Palin..even elitists...so called republicans. So called conservatives even attack Palin. But are they either republicans or conservatives?

I would say they are neither. Anyone can put an R to the right of their name but that doesn't make them either a Republican or a conservative.

Even after Sarah Palin decided to step down as Governor or Alaska...they still continue to attack her. Palin didn't step down because of any impropriety but rather to save Alaska taxpayers the expense of defending her against the malicious allegations all of which proved to be bullshiit. She's also racked up about $500,000 in legal fees to defend herself against bullshiiit allegation.

Still, they're not satisfied and continue their attacks.

I once said leftists are scared shiitttless of Sarah Palin and they really should be. She connects with common sense middle America in a way elitists of the left or right cannot.

So, while elitists support the likes of Arlen Specter, Olympia Snow, Mel Martinez, Charlie Crist and other RINOs...Republicans in Name Only..those who stab America in the back at every opportunity; those who think they were elected to office to get along with the most radical leftists in Congress in the history of America..Sarah Palin's stated intentions are to set things right in Washington and "not to gain the good opinions of Washington elitists of either the left or right".

Were it not for Sarah Palin, McCain would have lost in a landslide. It was Palin who energized conservatives who realized McCain is not close to being a conservative. Even with all the baggage McCain drags around, he still would have won if he had not rushed back to Washington to tout, support and preach that the sky was falling in support of TARP. That single action cost McCain the election because conservatives knew from the beginning it was a government boondoggle of gigantic proportions.

History has proved conservatives were right about TARP. The money has been misappropriated and was never spent as the bill directed. That money went down the rat hole.

Most conservatives who voted, didn't vote for McCain, they voted for Palin in spite of McCain and that's what scares the hell out of the elitists of both the left and the right.

Sarah Palin is the biggest threat to elitists on their radar. She seemingly came out of nowhere and she sure as hell isn't one of them and doesn't want to be.

Image someone who made the kind of impact in a Presidential election Sarah Palin made in only a couple of months..and not the years most candidates invest in getting elected.

The writer of the following article thinks it's jealousy which impels elitists to attack Sarah Palin.

I don't. I think it's raw, naked abject fear Palin is going to one day pull their politically, financially corrupt house of cards down around their ears. I think they're right.

July 18, 2009
Peggy Noonan: Sarah Palin Jealous
By Stuart Schwartz

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. But it's not the normal kind of jealous, the kind reserved for girlfriends who can squeeze into size 2 jeans. No, it's the kind of jealous that hurts, that grabs your gut and twists, that has you howling with rage into your pillow in the middle of the night, screaming "It's not fair" like a two-year-old denied another piece of cake. It is Sarah Palin jealous...and it is consuming you.

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You are a card-carrying member of the intellectual conservative elite, a PBS-anointed expert on family values who worked for both Ronald Reagan and Dan Rather, a talented speechwriter and wordsmith. And you are fuming: Sarah Palin refuses to be yesterday's news. You just can't get her out of your mind.

And, what's worse, everyone continues to talk about her. You've tried everything, using your mainstream media platforms, your Wall Street Journal columns, and powerful friends -- so many of them -- to savage her, to give her a rhetorical beating so fierce that it would bring a smile to the face of Vince McMahon -- if you knew who he is, and if you had ever watched a WWE wrestling match, which he heads. "She is a complete elite confection. She might as well have been a bonbon," you wrote, your $300 manicured fingers shaking on the keyboard.

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. So you loosed a multi-column primal scream: Palin is an idiot who is "out of her depth in a shallow pool", a woman who has no sense of personal limits because she is not even smart enough to realize she is "a ponder-free zone." Whoa-good one! The rhetorical equivalent of the chickenwing camel clutch, where you come up behind and twist her arm behind her back, and then force her face to the mat. Or, in her case, to the snow. That's what they have in Alaska, don't they? You don't know, of course-Martha's Vineyard is about as far north as you venture, and then only to observe humanity-you know, the common folks-from "a little pier" before strolling over for dinner with two of the more brilliant stars in your friends firmament, television personalities Diane Sawyer and Katie Couric.

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You pal around with Sawyer and Couric, Jane Fonda, Marlo Thomas, Lily Tomlin -- the world is your aging oyster -- and The New York Times (which is sort of iffy on your writing) admires you for the company you keep. The Manhattan and beltway salon denizens love you. Brian Williams even said he'd nominate you for a Pulitzer, calling your writing "sparkling." Yes, THE Brian Williams, He Who Anchors NBC News, who had an audience with President Obama, to whom he bowed when leaving.

You hang with the grandees, and they understand the world. Unlike Sarah Palin, who uses a pier simply to fish and wouldn't know a winsome observation if it jumped into her net. And you just don't understand the crowds, the admiration for someone who owns the kind of fishing boat that is not equipped with a champagne cooler. Oh, the unfairness of it all!

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You don't understand it. Sure, maybe she has accomplished a few things (like the $26 billion dollar natural gas pipeline deal, restructuring Alaskan government, and taking an ice pick to corrupt politicians). But she has no style, no pizzazz -- she just does stuff. But so do you -- and you can't understand why you don't get the same adoration. After all, didn't you go before the New York Landmarks Preservation Commission and not just protest, but elegantly protest -- so said The New York Times -- a 16-story tower a developer wanted to build in your ritzy Upper East Side Manhattan neighborhood? Sarah Palin wouldn't have done that; she's not brilliant enough to understand preservation. She probably would have looked at the jobs the construction would create and given it a déclassé "Hell yeah!"

But you're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. Why didn't you get acclaim for your accomplishment? You're every bit as go-get'm as that baby mama from the tundra. You went before the commission hand-in-hand with actor Kevin Kline and Woody Allen -- just a couple of guys from the ‘hood -- and protested this outrage. You looked those preservation commissioners in the eyes, and quoted Prince Charles. Yes, THE Prince Charles, of Princess Diana fame, who -- you told them -- once called a facelift for the National Gallery in London ''a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much loved and elegant friend.'' Can you imagine Sarah Palin resisting with such elegance?

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You don't understand it: Sarah Palin has never stood in front of bulldozers with Kevin Kline, and yet they cheer her. And she wouldn't stand anywhere near Woody Allen, who she'd probably insist register as a pedophile. The assorted celebrities -- neighbors all -- cheered your courage in noting that your wealthy enclave, filled with the best and brightest, did not need a building that was the equivalent of low-income housing, what with units starting at a mere $7 million. Talk about slumming.

You called attention to how the new construction would block the sun on Woody Allen's nearby $24 million mansion, not to mention annoy Robert De Niro and Jerry Seinfeld, as if they weren't annoyed enough by the notoriety given to the neighborhood by the television hit Gossip Girl. Not in my backyard! Workers of the Upper East Side unite -- you have nothing to lose but your carbuncle! And so the developer agreed to a smaller building, more a boil than a carbuncle. Success! Take that, Sarah Palin, you "bulls**t" outsider!

You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You do stuff, too -- and yet all you hear is Sarah, Sarah, Sarah. Don't they read your columns, don't they understand that she's "dropping her G's," that she is "faux down-home, patronizing-and infantilizing"? You have ten, maybe a hundred times the vocabulary she has, and yet they're talking about her. Don't you read my columns, people!? She is a "dope and unqualified," representative of "a new vulgarization" and still, they talk about her.
You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You started a new venture, "The Women on the Web" website, a very conservative, free-enterprise thing to do and still you are not appreciated. They talk about the Palin family fishing business-big deal. Anyone can get a couple of fish -- just call Leonards' on Third Avenue and they will deliver. But Palin is not the only savvy executive type. You got together with your closest friends, all the kind of women who, unlike Sarah Palin, live in the real world where women wear "Channel jackets" and "long, flowing pants with heels," and understand life, as Reuters noted, "on a level that goes beyond the mundane." You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. Your "beyond the mundane" co-founders -- "buds" as the Sarah Palin types so crassly put it-for your new venture are the essence of your kind of middle America: they include "60 Minutes" reporter Lesley Stahl; actresses Candice Bergen (actress, Democratic and Planned Parenthood spokesperson), Whoopi Goldberg (dropped by advertisers after a nasty Bush joke at a Democratic fundraiser and then hired by The View, a Barbara Walters talk show on ABC ), and Marlo Thomas (a major Democratic donor who is married to Bush-hater Phil Donahue), your type of conservatives, which puts them a bit to the right of Hugo Chavez. But after a year the audience is less than 20 percent of what you defined as success, your investors are worried, and the same women who pack Sarah Palin rallies are ignoring your venture, which features such pieces as "Michelle Obama's Scintillating Style" and "French Fashion Designers Churn Out Stylish Burqhas."What is wrong with this country? Isn't anyone a real conservative anymore? Don't they listen to you? Can't they read without moving their lips?You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. And, worst of all, Sarah Palin is not.

posted July 19, 2009 07:31 PM         

quote:

---

seems to me the only people flogging the palin horse are disgruntled conservatives...katatonic

---

You are either the worst informed/misinformed person on this site or you are deliberately disingenuous katatonic.

In either case, rational discussion cannot be had with you.

Of course, I know you're far too busy to ever check anything before you say it here. You could have googled Sarah Palin and found a multitude of leftists commenting about Palin...if you weren't so very, very busy.

Sarah Palin Turns Pro
Paul Begala
Posted: July 3, 2009 10:35 PM

Sarah Palin makes Mark Foley, the congressman who sent filthy emails to pages look almost normal. She makes David Vitter, the senator who was hanging out with hookers, look almost boring. She makes Larry Craig, caught hitting on a cop in a men's room, look almost stable. She makes John Ensign, the senator who was having an affair with a staffer, look almost humdrum (and compared to the rest of the GOP whack-jobs, he is). And she makes Mark Sanford, the governor with the Latin lover, look positively predictable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-begala/sarah-palin-turns-pro_b_225633.html

Op-Ed Columnist
Now, Sarah’s Folly
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: July 4, 2009
New York Times

Sarah Palin showed on Friday that in one respect at least, she is qualified to be president.
Caribou Barbie is one nutty puppy.

Usually we don’t find that exquisite battiness in our leaders until they’ve been battered by sordid scandals like Watergate (Nixon), gnawing problems like Vietnam (L.B.J.), or scary threats like biological terrorism (Cheney).
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/opinion/05dowd.html?_r=1

David Letterman
Schultz: Palin 'Nothing But Political Slime'
By Mark Finkelstein | June 16, 2009 - 21:47

David Letterman "jokes" about Sarah Palin's teenage daughter having sex with A-Rod during a baseball game. For good measure he suggests the daughter would be of interest to Eliot Spitzer, infamous for soliciting a prostitute.

If Ed Schultz condemned Letterman, I missed it.

posted July 19, 2009 11:34 PM         

quote:

---

seems to me the only people flogging the palin horse are disgruntled conservatives...katatonic

---

Apparently you don't bother to read what you write here...or perhaps your grasp of English is insufficient for you to know what you said.

posted July 20, 2009 04:34 PM         

quote:

---

seems to me the only people flogging the palin horse are disgruntled conservatives...katatonic

---

Clearly, this isn't at all true and any casual check would have shown it to be NOT TRUE.

July 20, 2009
NY Times reaches a new low
Jack Kemp

Back at the time of the William Kennedy Smith rape trial in Florida, in the 1990s, the NY Times had published the name of the alleged rape victim after the local New York WNBC television station aired it. Later, at the trial, the then-head of the National Enquirer was entering the court building when journalists asked him if he would be also publishing the name of the alleged rape victim.

In answering in the negative, an incredible role reversal occurred. The National Enquirer publisher lifted his nose and sneered, "Who do you think we are? The New York Times?"

This month, Noel Sheppard's Newsbusters reports:

[b]"On July 12, the New York Times claimed Sarah Palin's hair was thinning, and used it as evidence that the Alaska governor was not handling the stress of office well:

Friends worried that she appeared anxious and underweight. Her hair had thinned to the point where she needed emergency help from her hairdresser and close friend, Jessica Steele."

Gov. Palin's hairdresser has denied the charges, Newsbusters goes on to say.

Even my own low opinion of the New York Times has been lowered. They have now become Maureen Dowd Meets The Weekly World News.

What Rush Limbaugh has referred to as "The Chickification of the News" is in full oeuvre here. The New York Times is now publishing a gossip opinion about Gov. Palin's hair - with no medical evidence to back up their catty remark. Did their reporters overhear this in the lunchroom of an exclusive Manhattan private girls' school? Or was it written on a bathroom wall?

The Times is obviously clearly afraid of Sarah Palin. But who thought that they would sound like a girls' lunchroom clique IN PRINT, documenting their fear for all the world to see? Perhaps the two authors of this Times article, Jim Rutenberg and Serge F. Kovaleski, could take some lessons from the Alaskan Governor on how to comport themselves.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/ny_times_reaches_a_new_low.html

posted July 20, 2009 11:28 PM         

"disgruntled conservatives...katatonic"

posted July 21, 2009 11:13 AM         

Just weeks before she plans to step down from her position as Alaska governor, Palin signed House Joint Resolution 27, sponsored by state Rep. Mike Kelly on July 10, according to a Tenth Amendment Center report. The resolution "claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States."

Alaska's House passed HJR 27 by a vote of 37-0, and the Senate passed it by a vote of 40-0.

According to the report, the joint resolution does not carry with it the force of law, but supporters say it is a significant move toward getting their message out to other lawmakers, the media and grassroots movements.

Alaska's resolution states:

Be it resolved that the Alaska State Legislature hereby claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
Be it further resolved that this resolution serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

While seven states – Tennessee, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Alaska and Louisiana – have had both houses of their legislatures pass similar decrees, Alaska Gov. Palin and Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen are currently the only governors to have signed their states' sovereignty resolutions.

The resolutions all address the Tenth Amendment that says: "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Tenth Amendment Center also reported that Florida State Sen. Carey Baker, R-Eustis, introduced a memorial earlier this month urging "Congress to honor the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and United States Supreme Court case law which limit the scope and exercise of federal power."

"Now more than ever, state governments must exercise their Constitutional right to say no to the expansion of the federal government's reckless deficit spending and abuse of power," Sen. Baker said. "With this resolution, our Legislature can send a message to Washington that our state's rights must be respected."

The full text of Florida's memorial is available on the Tenth Amendment Center website.

As WND reported, South Carolina's proposal, S. 424, is titled: "To affirm South Carolina's sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution."

Essentially it's a reminder that the United States is made up of individual states; it's not a federal authority broken up into political subdivisions.

In South Carolina, the proposals remains pending in the state Senate, where Sen. Lee Bright said he still hopes that it will be adopted this year.

The proposal there notes specifically that the "federal government was created by the states … to be an agent of the states," and the states currently "are treated as agents of the federal government," many times in violation of the Constitution.

Bright told WND the movement is spreading from state to state as fast as lawmakers discover it.

Michael Boldin, a spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center, said his organization has created a posting for all such proposals to be tracked.

Among the states where such proposals at least have been considered are Louisiana, Colorado, Wisconsin, Florida, Illinois, West Virginia, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Nevada, Oregon, Alabama, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Idaho, New Mexico, South Dakota, Virginia, Kentucky, Alaska, Indiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, Minnesota, South Carolina, Georgia, Kansas, Texas, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Missouri, Iowa, Montana, Michigan, Arizona, Washington and Oklahoma.

In Louisiana, it passed the Senate in May and the House in June.

In Idaho, it passed the House in March and the Senate in April.

In North Dakota, it passed the House and Senate both in April, with the House a short time later adopting changes made by the Senate.

In South Dakota, it was approved by both houses of the Legislature and under that state's rules does not need the governor's signature.

In May, Rep. M.J. "Manny" Steele, a Republican in South Dakota, wrote that he believes up to $11 trillion is being wasted in the coming years by Washington's efforts "to duplicate and micromanage our states' affairs."

He said states should manage their own affairs and not be dependent on a federal cash cow to make ends meet. Likewise with industries, he said, citing federal cash dumps on the banking, insurance and automobile industries.

Steele told WND his dollar estimate was based on what President Obama himself has allocated in the coming years to spend on stimulus packages, industry bailouts and the like.

"If we would just let the market take care of these things," he said.

His letter noted that Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Carolina legislatures joined South Dakota's in passing some statement on the Tenth Amendment this year. The results vary based on state procedures, however. In Oklahoma, the governor vetoed the plan and it was launched on its second trip through the legislature and has been passed by the House.

posted July 21, 2009 06:09 PM         

"Apparently you don't bother to read what you write here...or perhaps your grasp of English is insufficient for you to know what you said."

English? Is that you're second language? Are you sure you are qualified to criticise Kat's grasp of the English language (Kat's native tongue) when you yourself undoubtedly speak "American".....
tut tut tut
Perhaps cross-communication IS happening here.

posted July 21, 2009 06:11 PM         

"ANCHORAGE, Alaska – An independent investigator has found evidence that Gov. Sarah Palin may have violated ethics laws by accepting private donations to pay her legal debts, in the latest legal distraction for the former vice presidential candidate as she prepares to leave office this week.

The report obtained by The Associated Press says Palin is securing unwarranted benefits and receiving improper gifts through the Alaska Fund Trust, set up by supporters.

An investigator for the state Personnel Board says in his July 14 report that there is probable cause to believe Palin used or attempted to use her official position for personal gain because she authorized the creation of the trust as the "official" legal defense fund.

The practical effect of the ruling on Palin will be more financial than anything else. The report recommends that Palin refuse to accept payment from the defense fund, and that the complaint be resolved without a formal hearing before the Alaska Personnel Board.

The fund aims to help Palin pay off debts stemming from multiple ethics complaints against her, most of which have been dismissed. Palin says she owes more than $500,000 in legal fees, and she cited the mounting toll of the ethics probes as one of the reasons she is leaving office.

A call seeking comment from her lawyer and an e-mail to her spokeswoman were not immediately returned.

Palin's friends and supporters created the Alaska Fund Trust in April, limiting donations to $150 per person. Organizers declined to say how much it has raised, and had hoped to raise about $500,000. A Webathon last month brought in about $130,000 in pledges.

In his report, attorney Thomas Daniel said his interpretation of the ethics act is consistent with common sense.

An ordinary citizen facing legal charges is not likely to be able to generate donations to a legal defense fund, he wrote. "In contrast, Governor Palin is able to generate donations because of the fact that she is a public official and a public figure. Were it not for the fact that she is governor and a national political figure, it is unlikely that many citizens would donate money to her legal defense fund."

The ethics complaint was filed by Eagle River resident Kim Chatman shortly after the fund was created, alleging Palin was misusing her official position and accepting improper gifts.

Palin was given a copy of the investigator's report a week ago, Chatman said Tuesday.

"It's an absolute shame that she would continue to keep the Alaska Fund Trust Web site up and running," Chatman told the AP.

At least 19 ethics complaints have been filed against Palin, most of them after she was named the running mate for GOP presidential candidate John McCain. Most of those have been dismissed, and Palin's office usually sends a news release with the announcement.

"She's not acknowledging the fact that the ethics complaint was credible," Chatman said. "When ethics complaints are dismissed, she's quick to publicly respond but this one, she's sitting on."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_on_re_us/us_palin_ethics_complaint