Occupy Wall Street and illogical responses to it

I have not yet written fully my opinion of the Occupy Wall Street movement because I don't know enough about it. What I do know is that SOME of their demands make sense.  Other people have written more thoroughly about it than I, but the basic gist I get is that there has been an imbalance between the corporations and the individuals that needs to be righted/regulated by the government and they don't see that happening.

Watching the REACTION to OWS, on the other hand, is easy to judge. For example, look at Florida Rep. Allen West engaging in two very clear and simple logical fallacies:
guilt by association

In this fallacy, one says the following: premise C is an A. Premise B is an A. Therefore, all C are B.
In this case,

I think there is a danger in the people on Capitol Hill starting to embrace this movement, especially now that we know that the American Nazi Party and the American Communist Party are also starting to align themselves with this Occupy movement,

You see: The people are part of occupy Wall Street. Communists and Nazis are part of occupy Wall Street. Therefore, all people involved are Communists or Nazis.

I don't think there's a name for a second (and, I haven't thought of a good Venn Diagram), but this one involves equating simplicity with truth. In it, you assume that if something is simple to understand and state, it must be good and true, but if it is complex or vague, it must be false.

See here:

When you talk to somebody with the Tea Party, they can tell you what they want -- limited government that’s constitutionally mandated, fiscal responsibility, they also want to see our free market and free enterprise systems adhered to, as well as our national security

Neither of these is true. Just because some bad elements have aligned themselves w/ OWS, that does not negate the possibility that OWS has valid interests. Also, just because their demands don't fit on a bumper sticker (Taxed Enough Already) doesn't mean their demands aren't just.