It's not really that far fetched - since the Tea Party people, from what I can tell, hate the banks just as much as the Occupy Wall Street people do.
The difference would have been that the Occupy Wall Street people were, pretty much, unarmed kids, hippies, moms, peacniks and liberals.
The Tea Party people, on the other hand, would have had a lot of guns - particularly in open carry states.
It's one thing for riot police to go in with sound cannons and batons at sleeping unarmed left wingers. It would have been a completely different situation if the people they were evicting had been well armed. You might have had another Waco on your hands.
This is not dissing the Tea Party people. It's saying that here is one instance when they are actually in the right - because the entire point of of the right to bear arms is the ability to fight back with force if the government sends in thugs to stop your right to free speech and assembly.
It's nice to think that we can win on the basis of our arguments, that we shall overcome because we are in the right. But you can be as right as you want - if your opponent has a gun and you don't, you lose, at least in the short term.