Actually, I don't see extreme enviromentalism as fitting neatly anywhere on the conventional one-dimensional political scale. The mindset is fundamentally reactionary--they seem determined to stop any change at all dead in its tracks. Yet the rhetoric has elements of anti-globalism and anti-capitalism.

So while I can't really answer your question, I will note one thing: All of those acts of violence you list are violence against property, not people (notwithstanding the risk that a metal spike driven into a tree can cause a nasty chainsaw accident).

I had to resort to Google to refresh my memory of any incidents of bombs being set off in front of military recruiting stations. That would be from early March, in New York. It's the only incident I know of that's happened since the '60s, making it "bomb" rather than "bombs". That's a technicality, and I'm not saying that makes it OK. But it makes it clearly an aberration, and police speculated that it was the same lone bomber who set off bombs in 2005 and 2007 at the British and Mexican foreign consulates in Manhattan. Note that the bomb exploded at 3:43AM--it was timed to minimize the risk of damage to people, making it another act of violence against property rather than people.

It would be easy to fall into the trap of finger-pointing here. To try and keep it under control, I'll just mention the Oklahoma City bombing and the murders of abortion doctors as two examples of acts of violence against people, avowedly carried out in the name of extreme RightWing ideologies. In the case of OKC, it was mass murder through the use of a weapon of mass destruction.

All of these incidents were perpetrated by people considered extremists even by the run-of-the-mill extremists of their respective political philosophies. As such, they're kind of off the topic of widespread attitudes and temperaments to be found in the two political camps. The existence of "exceptional" individuals doesn't mean my observations about the general anger and bitterness to be found in so many Conservatives are in any way invalid.

And very close to home, you certainly aren't angry and bitter, Robert. Talking about general trends and tendencies in no way implies universality. If I didn't know many exceptions to the generality, I wouldn't be wasting my time talking about the subject. The angry and bitter ones won't listen, they'll just go on the attack. My only hope that something good can come out of it is by talking to the reasonable and reasonably dispassionate Conservatives.