what I'm reading.

A brief re-cap of what I've been reading:

1. IKE a biography of Eisenhower
2. This article which seems to admit, for once, that conservative justices on the Supreme Court are guided not by some definitive doctrine, but by social conservativism dressed as such. Here is a quote:

   Most originalists would vigorously dispute the suggestion that constitutional or statutory provisions are so ambiguous that their original meanings cannot be given effect. (Judge Robert Bork once created controversy by suggesting that the Ninth Amendment, which alludes to unenumerated rights "retained by the people," was an unenforceable "ink blot"; few have embraced his argument.) But in the past, conservatives have been more receptive to the notion that legal texts often incorporate ambiguity, either by accident or by design, and that nontextual considerations must guide the judge's application of those laws in particular cases.

3. This article, which seems to have the author confused. Are gay rights rights granted by God, and if not, then why should Iran be ashamed to not grant them?

Of course, I am working also, but I cannot, at this time, write about that.