SkipCaptcha
1,357
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 162:
Line 162: +
→Mark Kirk
The idea that the stroke damaged his judgement does not sound unreasonable to me. I think that the main problem with the edit you reverted is that it treats this idea as a fact rather than a likely yet unproven possibility. I changed the wording [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mark_Kirk&diff=1056953&oldid=1056927 accordingly]. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 04:04, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
The idea that the stroke damaged his judgement does not sound unreasonable to me. I think that the main problem with the edit you reverted is that it treats this idea as a fact rather than a likely yet unproven possibility. I changed the wording [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mark_Kirk&diff=1056953&oldid=1056927 accordingly]. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 04:04, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
:The likelyhood of a stroke changing a person's political views are not supported by any reliable neuroscience research. I'm removing it as it seems to be at the best, an unproven claim. [[User:Brenden|brenden]] 13:27, 17 June 2013 (EDT)