[Mark Felton]

Jefferson was not a classical liberal which was a movement of the late 1800s.

The father of classical liberalism is considered by some to be Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679). A motivating force behind CL was the desire to strip the oppressive influence of the Church from the political system.

Jefferson certainly believed in such independence, but he did not buy into the notion that "ultimate good" was defined by man (the State), and was no longer the province of faith, or God.

The conservatives of the era certainly were motivated by powerful religious beliefs and doctrines, and felt it would be impossible to strip "God" out of the government.

Thus the beautiful compromise of the American government which acknowledges that rights are God given but are held and defended strictly by the individual citizen and not by government offices.

(I detract..)

I will address some of your other points in your post when I have more time. (I haven't much begun with a comparison of Jeffersonian versus Hobbesian classical liberalism. Definitions change over time...etc)

[JohnGalt]

I the real point I was trying to get at is that Jefferson was considered a sell-out to his cause. American culture has always exhibited a balance between 'conservative' and 'liberal' forces for a variety of different agendas, some ideological, come economical (see the merchant class of Boston versus the Southern Agrarian aristocracy.)

The real question was, radical localism versus a central state. The issue was never really decided in debate but in a cout detat called the Consitution. Jefferson was branded a sell-out by the radical localists (heirs to the Old Right (paleo-libertarian, paleo-conservativism) tradition in modern thought to the Hamiltonian view of a centralized state with a common culture. Both have elements that make up modern conservative thought, very little makes up modern liberal thought, thus paleo-libertarians find common cause with paleo-conservatives.