"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends ..." (cont'd)

MANIFESTO

I keep ruminating on a point I made a few months ago. Viz., what is the difference between me—who hoped for an overthrow of the Bush administration during the first eight years of the decade—and various Tea Partiers who sanction the same thing these days?

Atrios points out the ravings of

Republican congressional candidate Stephen Broden [who] stunned his party Thursday, saying he would not rule out violent overthrow of the government if elections did not produce a change in leadership.

The comments at the site are pretty harsh, but how am I any different from this idiot?

As much as I'd like to think that my perseverations were legitimate because I was right, it seems to me that that opinion is much too facile (if not naíve).

I'm in serious need of a political philosopher to set me straight.