Dear God not another comparison of Dubya with an English leader

In September's Vanity Fair, pretty boy conservative historian Niall Ferguson has an article comparing Dubya with Henry V, or at least Shakespeare's version thereof [VF is link-stingy so you'll have to take our version of the article on faith, or look for the newstand issue with Reese Witherspoon on the cover]. We are disturbed that Niall somehow missed our own contribution to this comparison -- both characters professed a distinctly double-edged love for France.

And then there's this continual need of conservatives to compare Dubya to some giant of English history, which even in the case of Henry V has undergone several rounds of debunking, such as here and here. Our own previously expressed position is that there's an uncanny resemblance of Dubya's worldview to that of Joe Chamberlain, but that's a name that's either too unfamiliar or has the wrong echoes for Dubya's boosters (especially those boosters who get Neville and Joe mixed up).

A final noteworthy thing about Ferguson's piece is that beyond the few obvious points, he doesn't even expand on the comparison all that much -- it's really just a sustained critique of Dubya, with the Henry V comparison as a veneer. And it's not for lack of material either, it's impossible not to think of the WMD charade as one reads the Archbishop of Canterbury's headache-inducing case for Henry's claim to France, complete with laugh line "So that, as clear as is the summer's sun" -- just like Colin Powell's speech to the UN. Do the "smart conservatives" feel the need to disguise their dissent just enough so that their fellow conservatives won't show their fangs?