Most of the examples cited were during the Civil War or very near to it when the times were characterized by a pre civil war or post civil war state while this Nation was at war with itself.
I believe that the others were actually National Guard units of the respective states themselves, not regular Army units, although the clearing of the bonus marchers may have been done by regular Army since it was on or near the Capital Grounds and the District of Columbia has no National Guard to speak of.
The President can call out the State(s) National Guard(s).
Deploying and using regular military forces within US soil during peacetime is a whole other turning of the worm.
My point is that sometimes people react to something like it is new and therefore sinister.
A perfect example is the banning of troops carrying weapons while on base unless specifically instructed to do so, which contributed to the Ft. Hood debacle. This was portrayed around here as a Clinton initiative to make the troops more vulnerable.
In actual fact I believe this has always been the case in the military. Officers kept control of arms except during actual training or combat. Officers were supposed to be armed at all times, which was one of the main distinguishing marks of an officer versus other ranks.