What were you doing in 1994? If you're old enough to vote, you were alive then. I was at Edgewater High School, in the marching band and German Club. (My nerd credentials run deep). One big highlight from that year was finally convincing my parents to let me get contacts instead of glasses. Yes, 1994 was an interesting year. Between Nancy Kerrigan getting clubbed on the leg by a figure skating rival, Kurt Cobain's suicide, and O.J. Simpson no longer being viewed as just that football player in the Naked Gun movies, it's amazing anyone managed to remember there was an election. And regarding that 1994 election, here's what some people you may recognize were doing:

Marco Rubio discusses his family history, the situation in Libya, the 2012 Republican Presidential Primary, and the VP issue with Bill O'Reilly.

In case you missed it, Bobby Jindal, the Republican Governor of Louisiana, was reelected last night. And, oh, by the way...notice how all those evil racist Southern Republicans voted to reelect an Indian guy? Those crazy racists, they keep voting for candidates like Susana Martinez in New Mexico, Nikki Haley and Tim Scott in South Carolina, and Florida's Marco Rubio and Allen West. And then there's all those racists who are propelling Ted Cruz to the top of the Texas Senate race and keep voting for Herman Cain at the straw polls.

The Washington Post published a ridiculous hit piece on Marco Rubio yesterday, claiming that "documents show" that Rubio had "embellished the facts" about his family's history, specifically how they came to America from Cuba. You can pinch your nose and read the article here. Because Rubio's family emigrated to America from Cuba in 1956, and Fidel Castro did not officially take power until 1959, writer Manuel Roig-Franzia claims that Rubio should not be able to say he is part of the Cuban exile community, and accuses Rubio of exaggerating his family's history for political gain. I have decided I will not call this article journalistic malpractice, because that would imply that what Roig-Franzia published yesterday was journalism, instead of an egregious attempt at character assassination. Roig-Franzia's belligerent distortions of history makes him a prime candidate to create the next campaign video for Alan Grayson (of "Taliban Dan" fame). The Washington Post and Manuel Roig-Franzia (as well as whichever blind and ignorant toad of an editor approved that article) owe Rubio a huge apology.

Judge for yourself: what makes more sense? That some D.C. staffer has some dark and nefarious power over Florida politicians he's never even met, and Rubio psychically predicted over five years ago that he would be a vice presidential contender? Or that a group of political operatives with an axe (or two) to grind would spread a false rumor?

Stay informed...stay involved...stay inspired... This long shot is getting shorter and shorter thanks to you!

ICYMI, Joe McGinnis, the alleged journalist who moved in next door to Sarah Palin and then wrote an extremely negative book about her and her family is in a world of trouble. Last week, Andrew Breitbart‘s Big Government site broke the news that McGinnis had admitted in an email that his book was full of “tawdry gossip” and rumors without any “factual evidence.”

Well, now Random House, the publisher of McGinnis’ book, is joining McGinniss in the hot water. After it became clear that Random House was aware of the lack of factual support for the accusations in McGinniss’ book, the Palins’ attorneys sent a letter warning them to preserve evidence in preparation of a potential lawsuit:

Michelle Malkin | Palin Lawyers Warn Publisher of ‘The Rogue’ Not to Destroy Documents Ahead of Possible Lawsuit

For the non-lawyers out there, this formal written notice not to destroy documents has serious legal implications. Every state has a different evidence code, but the general rule is that once formal notice is received, a potential defendant is legally required to comply with the request to preserve all evidence that could be relevant to the potential litigation. This includes not just written documents, but also emails and electronic records, handwritten notes, video and sound recordings, etc.

Penalties for wrongful destruction of evidence can be imposed against both the litigants and their attorneys, and can include monetary sanctions, being held in contempt of court, and, maybe worst of all, adverse rulings from the court. For example, if Random House wrongfully deletes emails that the Palins could have used to prove certain allegations, the court could rule that those allegations are accepted as true. In other words, if one party is caught destroying evidence, the other side could automatically win their lawsuit.

The rationale behind these rules is that it is not fair for a party to win a lawsuit because they hide or destroy evidence that the other side had a right to see. We have provisions to protect attorney-client privileged communications, trade secrets, personal medical records, etc. but the evidence that is relevant to business litigation must be disclosed in a proper and timely manner.

If I were advising Random House, I would tell them to immediately offer to publicly apologize to the Palins, revoke and destroy all copies of the book, disclaim any support for the contents, pay any legal bills that the Palins have incurred so far, and to donate a significant sum to the charity of the Palins’ choice.

[Cross-posted at Sunshine State Sarah]

My Senator, Marco Rubio, is currently in Libya as part of the first Congressional delegation to visit since the Qadafi regime was deposed. Senator Rubio has been speaking out more in foreign policy topics recently and yesterday, National Review posted his op-ed on the subject of religious and political oppression in Iran. Rubio highlights the plight of a Christian pastor named Yousef Nardarkhani, who is facing execution for abandoning Islam and refusing to recant his Christian faith:

IBOPE Zogby Poll: Perry Plummets to 18%; Trails Cain For Lead Among GOP Primary Voters

Rick Perry has tumbled by more than 20 percentage points over the past month among Republican presidential primary voters and is now second to Herman Cain, who leads the field with 28%.

Mitt Romney received little benefit from Perrys fall, garnering 17% of the vote for third place…

These results are from an IBOPE Zogby interactive pollconducted Sept. 23-26…

Note the dates of the Zogby poll. It just finished today, so while this is clearly a direct reaction to Cain’s earth-shattering Florida straw poll win, many of the voters were sampled before Cain’s incredibly powerful speech to the Presidency 5 delegates and the past 48 hours’ media circus.

[Cross-posted at Sunshine State Sarah]

Don’t miss:

Sunshine State Sarah | Phone call with Herman Cain

Sunshine State Sarah | Scott Plakon Endorses Herman Cain

UPDATE: Say what you want about Zogby’s methodology, but here’s a Fox News poll, released this evening, that uses traditional live telephone polling, and it shows Romney, Perry, and Cain neck and neck and neck with each other:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/28/fox-news-poll-gop-race-top-tier-now-romney-perry-and-cain/

Something might be happening here…

Let me ask you a question: when you were a child, did you ever sneak a cookie from the cookie jar? You waited until your mother had left the kitchen, right? No kid is dumb enough to try and swipe a cookie while Mommy is watching. In essence, LeMieux's claims of a conservative voting record are the equivalent of attempting to get praise for not stealing cookies while Mommy is watching.