Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
John and Abigail Adams had some interesting things to say about Alexander Hamilton. John Adams called Alexander Hamilton a "bastard brat of a Scotch pedlar," who had a "superabundance of secretions which he could not find whores enough to draw off." Finally Adams decried "the profligacy of his life; his fornications, adulteries and his incests."
Abigail wasn't much nicer. "Oh, I have read his heart in his wicked eyes. The very devil is in them. They are lasciviousness itself."
They thought he was a real perv. LOL.
Comments
And Hamilton in the only peron on out money who was not born in this country.
Posted by: Bacopa | January 11, 2009 7:24 PM
They felt pretty much the same way about party boy Ben Franklin when they were all together in Paris.
Posted by: tom van dyke | January 11, 2009 7:52 PM
Ok. I've got to find an excuse to use that on someone.
They really knew how to insult people then, didn't they? And not a single piece of profanity.
Posted by: Bachalon | January 11, 2009 8:00 PM
"superabundance of secretions which he could not find whores enough to draw off." . . . with that one statement, I have a higher regard for both of them!
Posted by: T. Fife | January 11, 2009 8:45 PM
Which given the rumors of TJ and Ben's diversions is perhaps more impressive. I wonder if it was merely his ignoble birth that caused the lack of license?
Posted by: abb3w | January 11, 2009 8:53 PM
No doubt Abby sat on her husband. "Two spikes would be extravagance!" - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | January 11, 2009 9:16 PM
Ward should have dated his quotes to provide context on when the Adams stated such about Hamilton.
Great leaders who create a sea change usually have guys like Hamilton supporting them, and Hamilton was President Washington's best when it came to having a delegate with both vision and an ability to drive policy as an extremely competent administrator, even when it meant driving right over former allies (Madison) and peers (Jefferson). What Hamilton was to Washington, I'm hoping Rahm Emanuel will be to Obama with the exception of Emanuel not requiring the type of creative vision Hamilton brought to Washington's cabinet. Such a force will make some enemies, particulary of your boss's peers if they lack such big engines working for them.
Adams on the other hand was at his most effective helping to craft a decision to revolt and a justification on why we should revolt, his best and his most energetic days were behind him by the time Hamilton assumed real power, in spite of Adams being our 2nd president after that happened.
One must also remember that while Adams was particularly sensitive about not getting the type of recognition that Washington and Jefferson enjoyed, where much of Washington's stellar record as president came as a result of having Hamilton on-board, a sensitivity I believe was warranted.
Posted by: Michael Heath | January 11, 2009 9:38 PM
From most of what I've read, there wasn't much about Hamilton to like. He certainly was competent, etc., but, for want of a better statement, the phrase "arrogant jerk" comes to mind.
Posted by: dogmeatib | January 12, 2009 9:34 AM
dogmeatib - Chernow's biography on Hamilton provides a nuanced view on him. There was much to like about Hamilton if you are atrracted to results-oriented people in spite of personality flaws, unless you opposed one of his positions, than he was every bit the hunter/killer that Michael Jordan or Larry Bird were on the basketball court or Carl Icahn was in the Boardroom.
I doubt New York City would have become the leading financial center on earth as quickly as it did if not for Hamilton. One can also look to two major public service contributors in providing America the huge competitive advantage of becoming a global manufacturing center and exporter, one being Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall being the other.
Considering that America's wealth and stature can be derived from two paradigm-busters (meritocracy and individual political freedom) and four sources: financial services, agriculture, manufacturing, and natural resources; Hamilton stands as a giant given his contributions. Here was a man who successfully lobbied for our political freedom via his enormous contributions to getting the Constitution ratified, his personal example of the benefits of a meritocracy rising from poverty, and his contributions to enabling private investment capital to invest in commerce and particularly manufacturing contrary to what Madison and Jefferson fought.
Hamilton played to win and unlike a Magic Johnson or Warren Buffet, was not blessed with the social skills to cut his enemies throats while having them bless you on the way down. However, Hamiliton was also a charming, though cocky guy. You love him when he's your pit bull, maybe not so much when he isn't. Not surprising then why Washington trusted him more than no other.
Posted by: Michael Heath | January 12, 2009 12:18 PM
Adams on the other hand was at his most effective helping to craft a decision to revolt and a justification on why we should revolt, his best and his most energetic days were behind him by the time Hamilton assumed real power, in spite of Adams being our 2nd president after that happened.
Very interesting, Mr. Heath. Certainly it was Hamilton's impetuousness in the political game [and personal failings as well] that led to his not becoming president. Newt Gingrich comes to mind.
You seem to be arguing that after an initial utility at firing up the revolution, John Adams was a bit of a mediocrity, a fellow with a proper pedigree at the right time and place to become president. George HW Bush comes to mind.
If I understand you correctly, I like the cut of your jib.
Posted by: tom van dyke | January 12, 2009 10:31 PM
Hamilton didn't become President because he couldn't; the Constitution specifically forbids it (Hamilton was born in the Caribbean island of Nevis). He was arguably the next best thing, though; as the de facto Prime Minister under a hands-off Washington, his mind and his pen invented much of the American federal government as we know it.
Posted by: CJ Alexander | April 16, 2009 7:01 PM