seanbury:

I say “is” because he’s still relevant.  Check out what this bitchin’ motherfucker said in his farewell address:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

Washington, who had a huge swinging dick, was distrustful of political parties.  He spends the last half of his speech warning against political parties and where they will lead.  And then, he pulls a fucking Nostradamus:

“In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.”

(emphasis added by me)

Now, maybe political parties are a necessary evil.  I’m just advocating against the belief that ALL truth lives on one side of an argument.  Or, further, that there are only two sides to any argument.

All I’m sayin’ is this:  George Washington was a rad sombitch who could’ve been King of the United States, but he said “No.”  That’s awesome.

That sounds like just some hoity-toity liberal propaganda if you ask me.  Go back to Berkeley hippie.