The New Murrey and Blue blog

All that Ricardians and Yorkists need to know about this article is the following:

“….Richard III (1483-1485): He was the brother of Edward IV. His ruthless method of removing all opposition and the alleged murder of his nephews made his rule very unpopular….”

Ruthless? Richard? If he had been, Margaret Beaufort would have been banged up somewhere for good and fed through a slot in the wall.

So I think the above extract should have been applied to her odious son, Henry the Weasel! After all, he certainly was ruthless (and his horrific son was even worse!). The boys in the Tower became the Weasel’s very inconvenient brothers-in-law and he had to make them legitimate in order to marry their sister. By so doing he also made their claim to the throne better than his own. So if anyone had good reason to dispose of these boys terminally ‘twas he, not Richard III!

As for Richard being unpopular….show me the proof. He certainly wasn’t unpopular in places where he was the lord, especially the north, which deeply mourned his demise. Yes, Richard was unpopular with the House of Lancaster, but then it wouldn’t have mattered which Yorkist king was on the throne, the Lancastrians would have schemed, plotted and denigrated. Richard was a good man, with the benefit of the people in his heart, and if he’d had the chance he deserved, he’d have ruled over a Golden Age. Instead we got the Weasel and his murderous descendants.