Who Are A Few of Your Favorite Founding Fathers?

[Dante]

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Franklin, Hamilton.

Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him. No victory over the British....no Constitutional Convention...and no Presidency as we know it without him.

Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.

Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.

Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.

Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.

Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.

Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely

Biased....but not completely unfair. Washington is rated by most historians as a top 5 President. He undoubtedly was the major figure in helping to defeat the British. The Constitutional Convention would likely not have happened or passed without his gravitas.

Pretty good resume I'd say.

Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.

I visited James Monroes home over the weekend. They said he took a bullet to the neck after crossing the Delaware and the doctor stitched it up and he kept fighting. He carried the bullet the rest of his life

The Louisiana Purchase was also his idea and he sold Jefferson on the idea

He was also a hero during the War of 1812. Truly an amazing man. Vastly underrated.

Hero? What did he do to warrant this comment?

 

[Dante]

Who Are A Few of Your Favorite Founding Fathers? You can include Abigail Adams if you so prefer.

Top of my current list of well know ones are: John Adams, John Marshall, Hamilton, Madison...

The why will come later as will names of some not so well known ones

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Franklin, Hamilton.

Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him. No victory over the British....no Constitutional Convention...and no Presidency as we know it without him.

Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.

Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.

Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.

Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.

Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.

Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely

Biased....but not completely unfair. Washington is rated by most historians as a top 5 President. He undoubtedly was the major figure in helping to defeat the British. The Constitutional Convention would likely not have happened or passed without his gravitas.

Pretty good resume I'd say.

Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.

Do historians who rate Washington so highly do so out of an inherent bias? Any 1st President would probably have been rated with this kind of bias. I'm just not sure I buy all of it -- because I don't see it. I've read lots, but maybe I'll stumble upon something. He was an impressive man for sure -- most all recorded observations attest to this, but he also appears at times to be vacant ala Reagan -- and I mean how Reagan was awol during what was really happening in areas like arms for hostages.

I have read where Washington was either not very politically aware or informed on important issues, and this is mentioned by both supporters and critics of Hamiton's influence on Washington.

My take on it is Washington was really quite simple and that served him and the state well. He was a poser for sure (think Oillie North wearing uniform before Congress) , but he did believe his own bs and his virtue and honor meant much to him.

 

[Agit8r]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

 

[WelfareQueen]

Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him. No victory over the British....no Constitutional Convention...and no Presidency as we know it without him.

Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.

Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.

Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.

Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.

Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.

Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely

Biased....but not completely unfair. Washington is rated by most historians as a top 5 President. He undoubtedly was the major figure in helping to defeat the British. The Constitutional Convention would likely not have happened or passed without his gravitas.

Pretty good resume I'd say.

Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.

I visited James Monroes home over the weekend. They said he took a bullet to the neck after crossing the Delaware and the doctor stitched it up and he kept fighting. He carried the bullet the rest of his life

The Louisiana Purchase was also his idea and he sold Jefferson on the idea

He was also a hero during the War of 1812. Truly an amazing man. Vastly underrated.

Hero? What did he do to warrant this comment?

Madison's Secretary of War during the War of 1812 was an idiot from New York named John Armstrong.

Armstrong was responsible for the defense of Washington. I think we all know that was not handled real well to say the least. The White House and city were burnt to the ground.

The degree to which Armstrong screwed things up is truly staggering. Madison was so pissed off by Armstrong's incompetence he fired him on the spot and appointed Monroe as Secretary of War. Monroe was already Secretary of State at the time. He is the only American in history to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Monroe was in his fifties at the time. He rode off into battle and fought against the British in the defense of Washington. When intelligence indicated the British would turn and attack Baltimore, Monroe rode 50 miles in a fury to save the city. Monroe helped rally the defense of Baltimore and helped save it.

And dante....remember Monroe was an old man at the time (by the standards of the day). His courage during these battles was amazing. As rightwinger stated....he is the only President in U.S. history who was shot in combat defending his Country.

Monroe also served as a U.S. Senator and a Congressman, Minister to France, Britain, and Spain....and a 3 time Governor of Virginia.

And Dante....Monroe put forth John Quincy Adams as Secretary of State. Most historians consider Monroe and Adams the best President/Secretary of State combo in U.S. history.

As I said....an amazing man, and a true hero.

 

[Dante]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

 

[Dante]

[he is the only President in U.S. history who was shot in combat defending his Country.

JFK.?

 

[Dante]

Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.

Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely

Biased....but not completely unfair. Washington is rated by most historians as a top 5 President. He undoubtedly was the major figure in helping to defeat the British. The Constitutional Convention would likely not have happened or passed without his gravitas.

Pretty good resume I'd say.

Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.

I visited James Monroes home over the weekend. They said he took a bullet to the neck after crossing the Delaware and the doctor stitched it up and he kept fighting. He carried the bullet the rest of his life

The Louisiana Purchase was also his idea and he sold Jefferson on the idea

He was also a hero during the War of 1812. Truly an amazing man. Vastly underrated.

Hero? What did he do to warrant this comment?

Madison's Secretary of War during the War of 1812 was an idiot from New York named John Armstrong.

Armstrong was responsible for the defense of Washington. I think we all know that was not handled real well to say the least. The White House and city were burnt to the ground.

The degree to which Armstrong screwed things up is truly staggering. Madison was so pissed off by Armstrong's incompetence he fired him on the spot and appointed Monroe as Secretary of War. Monroe was already Secretary of State at the time. He is the only American in history to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Monroe was in his fifties at the time. He rode off into battle and fought against the British in the defense of Washington. When intelligence indicated the British would turn and attack Baltimore, Monroe rode 50 miles in a fury to save the city. Monroe helped rally the defense of Baltimore and helped save it.

And dante....remember Monroe was an old man at the time (by the standards of the day). His courage during these battles was amazing. As rightwinger stated....he is the only President in U.S. history who was shot in combat defending his Country.

Monroe also served as a U.S. Senator and a Congressman, Minister to France, Britain, and Spain....and a 3 time Governor of Virginia.

And Dante....Monroe put forth John Quincy Adams as Secretary of State. Most historians consider Monroe and Adams the best President/Secretary of State combo in U.S. history.

As I said....an amazing man, and a true hero.

Agree with almost all. and with that, still don't see how hero applies. I think a quote by Michael Collins applies here. When asked about current society he replied he was irritated with the "adulation of celebrities" and the "inflation of heroism" -- methinks our society is not much different than the early American ones

 

[Dante]

interesting and Dante is amused that it is a recent critique:

Critics called the conflict “Mr. Madison’s War.” Later historians would sometimes call it the Second War of American Independence. In Canada, the war looms larger in memory, as part of the founding mythology of the nation (“Canada” being a plausible answer to the who-won question).

What everyone seems to agree on is that the United States chose to wage a war for which it was spectacularly unprepared. The young republic had a vast territory and a miniature army and navy.

Madison was a Republican (sometimes called a Democratic-Republican), like his predecessor, Thomas Jefferson, who came to power by promising tax cuts and a small federal government. This proved problematic when the United States declared war on the mighty British Empire.

D.C. s darkest day a war that no one remembers - The Washington Post​

 

[WelfareQueen]

[he is the only President in U.S. history who was shot in combat defending his Country.

JFK.?

I consider JFK another true American hero and an excellent President. But he was never shot in combat. However, I do not say that in anyway to minimize his service. This is what he did per wiki. As I say...a true hero.


"On August 2, 1943, Kennedy's boat, the PT-109, along with the PT-162 and the PT-169, was performing nighttime patrols near New Georgia in the Solomon Islands,[23] when PT-109 was rammed by the Japanese destroyer Amagiri.[24] Kennedy gathered his surviving crew members together in the water around the wreckage, to vote on whether to "fight or surrender". Kennedy stated, "There's nothing in the book about a situation like this. A lot of you men have families and some of you have children. What do you want to do? I have nothing to lose." Shunning surrender, the men swam towards a small island.[25]


Kennedy, despite re-injury to his back in the collision, towed a badly burned crewman through the water with a life jacket strap clenched between his teeth.[26] He towed the wounded man to the island, and later to a second island, from where his crew was subsequently rescued.[27] For these actions, Kennedy received the Navy and Marine Corps Medal with the following citation:

For extremely heroic conduct as Commanding Officer of Motor Torpedo Boat 109 following the collision and sinking of that vessel in the Pacific War Theater on August 1–2, 1943. Unmindful of personal danger, Lieutenant (then Lieutenant, Junior Grade) Kennedy unhesitatingly braved the difficulties and hazards of darkness to direct rescue operations, swimming many hours to secure aid and food after he had succeeded in getting his crew ashore. His outstanding courage, endurance and leadership contributed to the saving of several lives and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

 

[Dante]

[he is the only President in U.S. history who was shot in combat defending his Country.

JFK.?

I consider JFK another true American hero and an excellent President. But he was never shot in combat. However, I do not say that in anyway to minimize his service. This is what he did per wiki. As I say...a true hero.


"On August 2, 1943, Kennedy's boat, the PT-109, along with the PT-162 and the PT-169, was performing nighttime patrols near New Georgia in the Solomon Islands,[23] when PT-109 was rammed by the Japanese destroyer Amagiri.[24] Kennedy gathered his surviving crew members together in the water around the wreckage, to vote on whether to "fight or surrender". Kennedy stated, "There's nothing in the book about a situation like this. A lot of you men have families and some of you have children. What do you want to do? I have nothing to lose." Shunning surrender, the men swam towards a small island.[25]


Kennedy, despite re-injury to his back in the collision, towed a badly burned crewman through the water with a life jacket strap clenched between his teeth.[26] He towed the wounded man to the island, and later to a second island, from where his crew was subsequently rescued.[27] For these actions, Kennedy received the Navy and Marine Corps Medal with the following citation:

For extremely heroic conduct as Commanding Officer of Motor Torpedo Boat 109 following the collision and sinking of that vessel in the Pacific War Theater on August 1–2, 1943. Unmindful of personal danger, Lieutenant (then Lieutenant, Junior Grade) Kennedy unhesitatingly braved the difficulties and hazards of darkness to direct rescue operations, swimming many hours to secure aid and food after he had succeeded in getting his crew ashore. His outstanding courage, endurance and leadership contributed to the saving of several lives and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

JFK was shot right out of his PT Boat. He was wounded as a result. I guess all those Confederate soldiers killed and wounded walking or patrolling were not shot in combat? Confederates killed on ships? On horses?

 

[Agit8r]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

 

[Dante]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

Madison was often the voice of moderation on his side as Adams was on his side (the high Federalists were livid at John)

 

[Dante]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

and when Adams or Madison speak about 'parties' they do NOT mean the same thing we mean today. Parties as we know them did not exist

I've read a few books that blew my mind wide open on this point.

 

[Agit8r]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

and when Adams or Madison speak about 'parties' they do NOT mean the same thing we mean today. Parties as we know them did not exist

I've read a few books that blew my mind wide open on this point.

Right. Though Jefferson and Madison were innovators in this regard, as theirs was "big tent" coalition of interests (Jacobins, anti-federalists, farmers and laborers)

 

[Dante]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

and when Adams or Madison speak about 'parties' they do NOT mean the same thing we mean today. Parties as we know them did not exist

I've read a few books that blew my mind wide open on this point.

Right. Though Jefferson and Madison were innovators in this regard, as theirs was "big tent" coalition of interests (Jacobins, anti-federalists, farmers and laborers)

Actually, the Federalists were big tent too. Each side initially thought of themselves as the anti-party party. They all tried to bring in others as a unity of spirit and cause. Each thought they represented what was best for the whole. In the early years of the USA, all sides professed detestation of factionalism. Parties as we know them came about gradually and ironically, out of necessity.

The federalist faction and the anti-federalist republicans sought to bring everyone under one roof and to sideline the leaders of opposition. Before the rebellion in America, English thought and tradition (colonists were English to their core fighting over English liberties) viewed opposition as we know it as vile, and treasonous

 

[norwegen]

Who Are A Few of Your Favorite Founding Fathers? You can include Abigail Adams if you so prefer.

Top of my current list of well know ones are: John Adams, John Marshall, Hamilton, Madison...

The why will come later as will names of some not so well known ones

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Franklin, Hamilton.

Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him. No victory over the British....no Constitutional Convention...and no Presidency as we know it without him.

Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.

Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.

Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.

Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.

This doesn't really explain the broad range in the political spectrum that you've chosen.

1) Hamilton, on the opposite end of the Whig spectrum as Patrick Henry, is someone I would consider more of a Tory. His fiscal-military ambitions and visions of a leviathan state, to my mind, place him even to the left of virtually any of the other Federalists.

2) And Washington, rather than resist Hamilton's proclivities to building a state that would manage the economy and tax the people, took the "interloper" under his wing. Washington, as splendidly as he redeemed himself in the Revolutionary War after his Seven Years' War fiasco, may be a notable founder, but more as a general than as a politician (to my mind, anyway).

Throwing these two in with the four founders of a more libertarian-republican persuasion still makes this an "interesting grouping."

1) your notes on Hamilton:
huh? Tory = left? "leviathan" can you post without the usual hyperbole?

It is what it is.

2) "interloper" if you explain this one and keep your head up...

The West Indies were never a part of the American experience. Motivated almost entirely by its economy, the colony remained loyal to Britain and her transoceanic trading network.

 

[Agit8r]

Paine, Jefferson, Madison, Samuel Adams

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

and when Adams or Madison speak about 'parties' they do NOT mean the same thing we mean today. Parties as we know them did not exist

I've read a few books that blew my mind wide open on this point.

Right. Though Jefferson and Madison were innovators in this regard, as theirs was "big tent" coalition of interests (Jacobins, anti-federalists, farmers and laborers)

Actually, the Federalists were big tent too. Each side initially thought of themselves as the anti-party party. They all tried to bring in others as a unity of spirit and cause. Each thought they represented what was best for the whole. In the early years of the USA, all sides professed detestation of factionalism. Parties as we know them came about gradually and ironically, out of necessity.

The federalist faction and the anti-federalist republicans sought to bring everyone under one roof and to sideline the leaders of opposition. Before the rebellion in America, English thought and tradition (colonists were English to their core fighting over English liberties) viewed opposition as we know it as vile, and treasonous

True. Though I've always though of the differences in the federalist party being mostly sectional. Georgia and South Carolina being the commodity-based Federalist strongholds in the South, while New York, and the New England states were their mercantile strongholds in the North. It seems that this difference helped accelerate that party's demise.

Half a century later, a similar division of interests split apart the Democratic Party, though less fatally.

 

[Dante]

Who Are A Few of Your Favorite Founding Fathers? You can include Abigail Adams if you so prefer.

Top of my current list of well know ones are: John Adams, John Marshall, Hamilton, Madison...

The why will come later as will names of some not so well known ones

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Franklin, Hamilton.

Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him. No victory over the British....no Constitutional Convention...and no Presidency as we know it without him.

Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.

Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.

Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.

Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.

Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.

This doesn't really explain the broad range in the political spectrum that you've chosen.

1) Hamilton, on the opposite end of the Whig spectrum as Patrick Henry, is someone I would consider more of a Tory. His fiscal-military ambitions and visions of a leviathan state, to my mind, place him even to the left of virtually any of the other Federalists.

2) And Washington, rather than resist Hamilton's proclivities to building a state that would manage the economy and tax the people, took the "interloper" under his wing. Washington, as splendidly as he redeemed himself in the Revolutionary War after his Seven Years' War fiasco, may be a notable founder, but more as a general than as a politician (to my mind, anyway).

Throwing these two in with the four founders of a more libertarian-republican persuasion still makes this an "interesting grouping."

1) your notes on Hamilton:
huh? Tory = left? "leviathan" can you post without the usual hyperbole?

It is what it is.

2) "interloper" if you explain this one and keep your head up...

The West Indies were never a part of the American experience. Motivated almost entirely by its economy, the colony remained loyal to Britain and her transoceanic trading network.

West Indies? He came to the when he was around 14 years old. he fought in the war.

when did your family come to America?

 

[Dante]

3 radicals and Madison? interesting

It's true. Though Madison could still appeal to the sentiments of radicals, as we find out from his writings in the National Gazette.

Equality James Madison Parties

and when Adams or Madison speak about 'parties' they do NOT mean the same thing we mean today. Parties as we know them did not exist

I've read a few books that blew my mind wide open on this point.

Right. Though Jefferson and Madison were innovators in this regard, as theirs was "big tent" coalition of interests (Jacobins, anti-federalists, farmers and laborers)

Actually, the Federalists were big tent too. Each side initially thought of themselves as the anti-party party. They all tried to bring in others as a unity of spirit and cause. Each thought they represented what was best for the whole. In the early years of the USA, all sides professed detestation of factionalism. Parties as we know them came about gradually and ironically, out of necessity.

The federalist faction and the anti-federalist republicans sought to bring everyone under one roof and to sideline the leaders of opposition. Before the rebellion in America, English thought and tradition (colonists were English to their core fighting over English liberties) viewed opposition as we know it as vile, and treasonous

True. Though I've always though of the differences in the federalist party being mostly sectional. Georgia and South Carolina being the commodity-based Federalist strongholds in the South, while New York, and the New England states were their mercantile strongholds in the North. It seems that this difference helped accelerate that party's demise.

Half a century later, a similar division of interests split apart the Democratic Party, though less fatally.

The Federalists demise had far more to do with what you mention. From what I know.. the voting patterns of elected representatives in the House can be analyzed by charting the 'no party' votes as they decline (idea taken from Jospeh Charles - The Origins of The American Party System). Both parties as they are forming show members of both supporters and opponents of the Constitution. We look at battles over 'commercial policy' of the administration and "Funding, Assumption, the National Bank, and the Jay Treaty."

The thesis linked to also goes into the facts (letters , writings, all that is available so far as we know...) to support the idea that Jefferson had very little to do with the early formation of what later became the Jeffersonian Republicans.

 

[Politico]

None of the founding fathers are worthy of respect.