What's the matter, I thought you loved cut n' paste? I thought you felt that extraneous commentary meant nothing next to verifiable quotes! Do you think I'm lieing?
I assume what you'd want is a transcribed text of the debate, hosted by a reputable source. If you can find that, good on you. It's been two years since the event and I can't. What I have found are MULTIPLE reliable sources both on the right and left, many of them actively quoting the event. You don't believe them? Fine. Here are two links.
First from the left;
http://yesrick.com/121499.htm
There I THINK I finally found what you were noodling about. Read the whole article and you'll find that the moderator did indeed change his wording when he got to Governor Bush to simply from 'political philosipher thinker' to 'philosipher thinker'. But that was Immidiately follwoing using the first version of the wording to Forbes and Keys. NONE of the reports on the debate I've found even from Regans former Speech writer Peggy Noonan took the nature of the question as having changed. If you are asserting that Bush really did, and made no blunder here or disagreed with you then I applaud your novel interpretation of events.
Now, a link from the center (and if you ask me right leaning) CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/1999/ALLPOLITICS/...gion.register/
Please note the EFFORT I've made (as opposed to being "unwilling to give me the info") to find reports sensative to alternative interpretations favoring you and W. not disagreeing. I think my efforst were HIGHLY charitable! I've all but given you the opportunity to weasel out of the difficult pposition YOU put yourself
in. The CNN story (and I've already given you this, simply by cutting and pasting a quotr from it of saay five wors into Google would have found it for you, but no, I'm the "Unwilling" one here) goes so far as to mention W's 'clarification' on how he understood the question.
"I want to answer the question"
You would be hard pressed to find anyone who's been reading this who'd agree with that. If anyone here thiinks Naldo has demonstrated a desire to answer this question, feel free to chime in.
I want to underline the origianl point in ALL of this, which is you feel VERY uncomfortable finding ANY point of disagreement between you and one of your heros, which I think is highly telling in terms of your character, your freedom of thought (To be frank, I think it puts you in a fairly 'tiny box') and your credability. If you feel some schoolyrd need to 'turn the tbales' on me, as you've attempted with Kevin, name ANY thinker, political or otherwise, past or present, give me ONE DAY and I'll find points where we differ. Why? Becuase I think for myself.