When the Occupy movement first came out, I thought it looked like a bunch of unwashed idealistic hippies, an inarticulate mass of young people who were just looking for an excuse to protest because they wanted to defy their parents (or a generic substitute in the establishment) - a natural impulse of many adolescents, but perhaps just a flash in the pan.
I was also concerned that the protests were costing municipalities money they couldn't afford to spare, as they had to police those areas more and provide enhanced sanitation services, etc., and that local businesses might suffer.
Further concern was due to a few well publicized sexual assaults at the sites of the protests and some hoo-ha about the chronically homeless taking an opportunity to "mooch" off the protesters, and how it posed a PC crisis of ethics or something like that.
Lastly, I feared that cynical globalists/socialists including the President himself had been attempting to co-opt the movement and steer it towards being (or seeming to be in the mainstream news) a sort of Greek chorus for their own platforms.
This all may have been at least partly true, but I think that with the passing of a few months, the Occupy activists that have hung on have become a bit more articulate. It has matured past being a street protest and has soaked back into activism carried out in the daily lives of its adherents. A couple of conversations with friends who are involved with Occupy has convinced me that the Occupy folks are pushing for a lot of the same things the Ron Paul supporters want. Mainly an end to the Federal Reserve Bank and a switch away from fiat currency to something backed by commodities, chiefly gold.
If Occupy and the Ron Paul supporters could find a way to get together, there would probably be enough critical mass there to try and rout out some of the corruption that has infected our system and that threatens to kill its host. I still think street protests accomplish nothing in and of themselves, but at least they got people talking.