What difference does it make. He lived in Hot Springs at the time. Any cite that hot Springs didn’t have a city bus? Why the fuck wouldn’t they?
Karl Rove,is that you?
So far I haven’t found anything about 1955, but for damned sure Hot Springs has a municipal bus system now.
Just a quick note to confirm that my OP is based on what I read at Limbaugh’s website. I don’t generally listen to his program.
OK, how the hell did you find that? I just spent ten minutes looking for it. What did you google?
Of course, nobody wants to admit that there are bullshitters of the highest order on both sides of the aisle. When the lefties of this board stop trying to deify Willy and his willy, and admit that he’s a liar, I’ll be here in the middle ready to shake your hand.
His baloney has a first name,
it’s ‘I did not inhale’
his baloney has a second name,
it’s ‘I’m not getting tail’
He loves to tell it every day
and if you ask him why, he’ll say,
that Billy Clinton has a way
of making horseshit sound Okay.
I started by Googling “Hot Springs municipal bus 1955” and didn’t get far. Deleted “1955” and put in “Arkansas” and found the link to the current transit system. I added “1955” back in and on page 2 of the Google hits I came across this page.
Scrolling down about a quarter of the way, I found “Hot Springs Street Railway” and Googled that. The first hit was to a page about the restoration of a streetcar from that line but the rest were – well, do you have any idea how many places are called “Hot Springs”? So I added “Arkansas” and re-Googled. The second hit was the “TRANSIT SYSTEMS IN ARKANSAS” page.
Piece o’ cake! 
You know, if you put half the effort scrutinizing the statements of the current President that you do with the former one, you might realize what a stupid cunt you are.
And that little black girl grew up to be America’s first African-American Secretary of State.
Who was female.
Why, thank you, EddyTeddyFreddy, for the information.
I retract my comments.
Name one leftie – no, I’ll make it easier for you --Name one Liberal or Democrat at SDMB who has claimed prior to your post that Clinton did not lie while in office.
I’m not even sure that you can be both at the same time. At any rate, he shows no signs of being pathological about it. I won’t defend him on being a panderer, but I have no idea if he’s shameless.
I’m guessing that he probably did alter the bus story some for the occasion. After Rosa Parks, transportation on buses did start changing even though we continued to have separate waiting rooms on interstate buses like Greyhound. The reason that he would remember who his friends were is because he probably rode with the same people every day for years. I can still name the kids that I sat with even though that’s the only time that I saw them.
I can also tell you that as you get older, you remember the same story in different ways. It is very possible that he remembers now that the mixing and mingling began when Rosa Park’s kept her seat. As a child you don’t always see these moments as great turning points in history. Something like that could just be “a change in the rules” for a kid, but take on a different perspective as you age.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how does Clinton’s exaggeration or even possible lie about his experience on a school bus at age nine, as told at a funeral, compare to the current Vice President of the United States wanting to be able to use cruel and inhumane torture on people suspected of having information about possible terrorist attacks?
Don’t doubt for one moment that if you are an American, your tax dollars would pay the torturers. Whatever is done would be done in your name; their blood would be on your hands unless you have done what you could to prevent this from happening. YMMV
Well, Elvislives claimed he didn’t commit perjury. Does that count?
Not really. Perjury’s a subset of lying.
Whether the story is true or not realy isn’t the point, I believe. It’s that **anyone ** would steal the thunder of a remarkable woman’s place in history, by telling a story relating to them. In doing so, this takes the focus off the true story of Rosa Parks actions and her place in history.
Why is it, do you think, that it’s overwhelmingly conservatives who are making this argument, and why do you think that the folks who most benefited from Ms. Parks’s legacy overwhelmingly oppose these conservatives?
I’m seeing some self-serving deception in this situation, but it ain’t Clinton’s.
Daniel
And I bet the son of a bitch would conveniently not recall having inhaled while receiving a bj from Rosa at the back of the bus. But you and I know the truth, don’t we, Stephe.
Yes. How odd to hear a story of how someone personally affected your life at a memorial speech!
Dumbass.
I agree with the first part of your claim: “Whether the story is true or not really isn’t the point.”
The point is that it serves to emphasize the effects that “the true story of Rosa Parks’ actions” had in a multitude of towns and cities across America, the way she served as an inspiration not just for the capital-C Civil Rights Movement, but for people all across the country who were inspired or awakened by her courageous actions.
In doing all this, Clinton’s story serves not to “take the focus” from Rosa Parks, but to highlight and reinforce “her place in history.”
To tell, you the truth, when i first heard Clinton’s story, it struck me as a little too neat, and as some sort of idealized past rather than an accurate record of exactly what a nine year-old boy may or may not have felt and done about civil rights in the 1950s. But there are times when a little embellishment—if, indeed, that’s what it was—is completely acceptable, and i think that when the purpose of that embellishment is to underscore the legacy of an admirable person at that person’s funeral or memorial service, then a bit of poetic license can be forgiven.
Notice, also, that i’m not alleging that Clinton’s story wasn’t true. So far, we have no evidence to show that it wasn’t, and none of the harping conservatives in this thread have provided the slightest scintilla of proof that what he said wasn’t the exact truth. All we’ve had is references to his willy, and his alleged propensity for lying. It’s just a shame that these folks appear more concerned by some possible exaggeration by a former President at a funeral than they are by confirmed and proven untruths uttered by the guy who still sleeps in the White House.
Whoa there Hector… PAX