Your ideology is flawed. Human beings are not divided into two camps, "Good" and "Bad." You do not slice the pie in two and and discard everyone in the "Bad" camp. If you do, and do so honestly, you will find in short order that you have discarded everyone who ever lived, or ever will.

Humans are complicated creatures with many flaws and nobilities. Because of Washington's actions in both the revolution and his presidency, a vast number of people enjoyed far more freedom than they would have otherwise. Also because of Washington's actions, some people had to endure a life a brutal slavery. Neither of these aspects is untrue, or erases the other from history by its existence. History, and humans, are often messy and uncomfortable. Stop trying to pretend otherwise. It is possible for Washington to be both a hero of freedom and a disappointing oppressor at the same time. This is the paradox of the human condition.

You're not enlightened. You haven't discovered some grand, hidden truth that all the world must know by pointing out that respected historical figures were flawed. We know. We've always known. We respect them anyway, because they did good as well as bad, and the good was a big deal.

You did a much better job than I did explaining why Washington is a risky person to associate with when trying to convey the idea of freedom. His legacy in that regard is too messy.

And you're absolutely right - I am not enlightened.

apparently washington was also generally a bad military strategist and tactician, racked by uncertainty and indecisiveness. he happened to get lucky in a couple crucial battles, otherwise we may have had no idea who he was. so luck strikes again, and washington the symbol is more relevant than washington the man.