1) Nationalist is NOT a "consolidationist" no matter what YOU think. Consolidationist was merely a term of opprobrium thrown around by lunatics it meant nothing.
2) I never claimed nationalism was abolitionism. Though it is perhaps too subtle for you, I mentioned how far Jefferson was willing to go to cement the Nation over the "rights" of states to protect slavery during his nationalist phase in the 1780s.
Like most things this last point requires a degree of thought which is beyond your capacity to do more than respond in a knee-jerk fashion.
Hamilton was practically Washington's second brain. He was respected and loved by Washington as no other man, much to the dismay and disgust of Jeffersonians. While Washington's chief aide during the Revolution Hamilton was trusted to decide weighty matters on the spot without consultation with the Commander because of the great trust in his judgment. During the administrations no man's opinion stood higher with Washington than Hamilton's and the number of instances where W didn't follow it are extremely small, perhaps you would like to provide some evidence refuting that statement. Hamilton even wrote "Washington's Farewell Address", a dire warning of the evils of secession.
Washington even put up with antics from Hamilton he would take from no other man. Only Lafayette compared with Hamilton in Washington's love, esteem and respect. Anyone who knows anything of either man knows that.
Nationalist is NOT a "consolidationist" no matter what YOU think.(yawn) I made it clear many many posts ago what I meant by the term, and what my useage of it was. Since you're ranting falsehoods have been disproven over and over, you now have nothing to fall back on except word games. Typical.
(hyperboles ad nauseum)...Hamilton even wrote "Washington's Farewell Address", a dire warning of the evils of secession.
BS. Another falsehood of Hamiltonian zealots. James Madison wrote the farewell address for Washington at the end of his first term, before he agreed to a second. After the second term ended, Washington asked Hamilton to look it over and update it (since by this time Madison had drifted apart somewhat from Washington due to Hamilton's game-playing). Hamilton did, after which Washington revised many of Hamilton's revisions. I bet you didn't even know that. Hamiltonian authors always leave out little "details" like that.
Only Lafayette compared with Hamilton in Washington's love, esteem and respect. Anyone who knows anything of either man knows that.
You mean anyone who has read the same slanted books as you knows that. James Madison was way ahead of Hamilton in the 'love' department until just the last few years.