I’ll have to disagree. I have yet to observe a person overcome by emotion whose reasoning ability exceeds that of a poodle. (And I’m being generous, because a poodle is a bright animal, as dogs go.)
Since the context here is politics, not relationships, let’s stay in that context. Suppose X happens politically which enrages you, for whatever reason. Fine. Now you’re incited to take some action (Y) because you’re enraged. Fine again. Your perogative as a citizen, as long as you’re operating within the law.
But at some point, since you’ve been incited to action. somebody’s going to ask you WHY you were enraged; you’re going to have to rationally explain your actions.
“Because I was really really pissed off” is not good enough. It’s childish. You need a reasoned politically relevant explanation as to why you were pissed off, and why you took the action you did. People who disagree with you will raise exculpatory evidence as to why you shouldn’t be as pissed off as you are, and/or why your actions were inappropriate. You will be required, if you have any desire to persuade, to debate them, without ad hominems and without demonizing them, and without calling them names.
In short, at some point, you’re going to have to rationally explain your emotion and your action, and if you can’t, all you’ve done is throw a big semi-adult temper tantrum.
None of the quotes you provided are contradictory to what I have written in the slightest.
Hope that helps.