As was Thomas Paine. Washington, Jefferson, et al were too before the Revolutionary War, they were just born in "the colonies". Hume and Adam Smith were Scots which should make them marginally palatable to you but Locke was as English as John Stuart Mill though his father was Scots as you can tell from the name, and liberalism like the US government, the Constitution and Bill of Rights and the Political and Financial world in general does not freeze itself in a bell jar just because it would be easier that way. What you propose is a species of Anarchy with no governmental control or interference in the actions of corporations or individual of whom you approve. The US government was an outgrowth of the Enlightenment and 18th Century liberalism as you have acknowledged, hence my previous assertion that it was a liberal democracy on republican lines, but government can't stand still, it faces new challenges and addresses them as well as those who run the government can manage. Teddy Roosevelt was called "The Trust Buster" at the turn of the century because trusts were an economic evil. Regulation of businesses and financial institutions does not all flow from FDR.
The Great Depression was brought on by the foolishness, avarice, and outright failure of American financial institutions, American businesses, and American individuals. Roosevelt attempted to address these issues. Apparently you and George Will and all the other Libertarian lunatics want to run the clock back to a point when it can all happen again. I can't understand your nostalgia for the conditions that brought the greatest hardship and misery upon this country and contributed in no small way to the Second World War through America's weakness and isolationism. Had America been healthy economically, and not engaged in navel gazing, Hitler would never have dared his adventurism, and Japan would have realized that the US was unbeatable, as indeed Japan should have, given the economic potential here. I can understand the wealthy like the Bush family being attracted to pre-Crash economics, but I can't understand anyone else's. It seems folly of the most extraordinary order to me. But then this forum is full of extremists of the Right so perhaps I should expect it.
Ideas don't lose value, but they are subject to change, evolution, expansion, even improvement. Other thinkers build on them and create new and valuable ideas as well. You can't freeze political philosophy or economics at some point in the distant past and say all subsequent thought is worthless, particularly not at the agrarian level of the 18th or 19th centuries. America changed massively, so much so that there was a Civil War between the agrarian South and the Industrial North. That war wasn't about slavery, it was about governance and those in favor of strong central government and federal supremacy won. That's the Republican legacy, the supremacy of the federal government. That apparently is the legacy you wish to reverse.
A study of the early pioneers of industry shows that having achieved dominance in one or another area of economic life, they assiduously worked to weaken competitors and undermine those coming up in order to preserve their pre-eminence. Is that the "American value" you seek to re-impose. Do you really want to return to the era of Robber Barons and an impoverished and unorganized workforce. The America I cherish ran from 1945 to about 1980. An America that tried to ensure equal opportunity to all. That's the American value I think most important, a reasonably level playing field and equal opportunity for everybody. And apparently that's what is anathema to most of the folks here at SE. It baffles me.
By the way, perhaps you'd like to check out my second cousin's paternal home on-line KP http://www.pamela-rae.com/ You're not the only Scot who's proud of his heritage.