Dang! I didn't know this was going to be an essay question!
Every history book, every accounting of him as a soldier/statesman depicts him as a natural leader, only asking his men to be accountable and give their best. His tactics were creative and effective. His character has historically been described as "unassailable" (Sumter) "unwavering in courage and character (Morgan) and "a man whose morals and courage engendered morals and courage from those who served with him." (Greene)
He has also been described personally as "Dour-faced", "Somber", and "somewhat lacking in the social graces." Since he didn't drink, those descriptions would be relevant coming from the rich planters of the time and place, who drank for recreation.
Racist? Well, probably. It was
the mid-to-late 1700's.
Whiney? I never read that anywhere. I'd be interested to see that resource.
Crude? Cruel? I think you have him confused with Col. Tarleton.
Okay. Seriously, I don't mind being wrong. But he's always been my hero, and if you can show me anywhere that he was any of the things which you ascribe to him, I'd be happy to read it and have my opinion changed.
Low country hearsay doesn't count.