Barack Obama routinely blames George W. Bush or Republicans in
the House of Representatives for anything that goes wrong or might
go wrong. Where did this trait come from? Was it Saul Alinsky, the
community action radical? Or was it William Ayers, the onetime
Weather Underground terrorist who was far more than the casual
neighborhood acquaintance Obama claims he was? The answer is,
neither. The real source of this Obama trait was Henry VII, King of
England (1485-1509) and his Tudor successors, abetted by William
Shakespeare.
The real story is now coming together with the scientific proof
that a skeleton unearthed last year from a car park in the town of
Leicester, England, is that of Richard III whose short reign
(1483-85) ended with his death at the hands of Henry Tudor’s troops
at the Battle of Bosworth Field. The ambitious Henry had Richard’s
body mutilated and strung up in the town square, then ignominiously
buried in an unmarked grave.
This marked the end of the Plantagenet kings of England and
brought in the long rule of Tudor monarchs. To make sure his line
succeeded, Henry steadily blamed all of the country’s problems on
Richard. Not only that, he also accused him of murdering his two
nephews, one of whom was next line after Richard’s brother, the
late King Edward IV. Henry’s allies also insisted Richard had
arranged for thugs to drown another of his brothers, the Duke of
Clarence, in a barrel of wine.
While Henry never hesitated to blame Richard for any policy
problems, he ignored the fact that Richard had been popular in many
parts of the realm (divided in loyalty between the Houses of York
and Lancaster in the War of the Roses) and that Richard’s
coronation in July 1483 had been well attended. Would it have been
if it had been widely believed he had murdered his nephews in the
Tower of London?
Henry tried to get his country men to forget that Richard had
done away with press censorship, created the right to bail for
those awaiting criminal trial, and reformed the country’s finances.
He also fought bravely in battles, despite a handicap.
Like Obama, Henry VII wanted his countrymen to think of his
predecessor as a poor leader and creator of failed policies. One
hopes that Obama’s efforts to demonize his own predecessor does not
last as long at Henry’s did. Over 100 years later (and 45 years
after the death of Henry’s son, Henry VIII), Shakespeare’s play
Richard III had its premiere. In it, the late king was
depicted as an evil, scheming hunchback (he had curvature of the
spine, but was not a hunchback) who, indeed, saw to the murder of
his brother and nephews — and probably his wife as well.
Shakespeare’s command of facts was thin. In the play he even had
Richard killing the Duke of Somerset at the battle of St. Albans,
which was fought when Richard was two years old.
Shakespeare had succumbed to the flattery of latter-day Tudor
flacks. The tales they told him were filled with intrigue and
action. Thus, it is the bad Richard that comes down to us to this
day.
Barack Obama seems to have learned the lessons of the Tudors
well, trashing his predecessor and opponents non-stop and making
free use of exaggeration, hyperbole, and untruths to make his
points.
This is not the end, however. With the identification of Richard
III’s skeleton, a proper burial is expected and his defenders are
finally getting attention for their efforts to set his record
straight. While Richard was killed in battle, George
Bush simply retired from office and has wisely kept his own
counsel about his successor.
In time, history and not a self-serving Chicago politician will
be the real judge of his record.
