So what does it all mean, the caucusing, the enormous turnout on the Democratic side (almost twice that of GOPers) and the final results?
It means what you suspect it does. The vast majority of our people have simply had all they can take of the inept kleptocracy into which the Bushes and Delays of the world have transformed our country.
This vote was a repudiation of a corrupt establishment in Washington, and a rejection of continuing on the failed conservative and corporatist paths blazed by the Decider.
On the Democratic side it's most obvious. Two-thirds of voters supported two candidates running directly against the establishment. Obama, the one who did a better job of convincing voters he was the agent of that change, got a slightly bigger piece of the pie than John Edwards, who also had an impressive showing.
They were only able to accomplish this, and in particular Obama, with the help of young and many first-time voters.
Youth turnout rate almost tripled in Iowa (CIRCLE www.civicyouth.org).
22% of the Democratic caucus goers were young voters, up from 17% in 2004.
On the GOP side, it may not have been young voters who made the difference, but their helping give Mike Huckabee a resounding victory--a man attacked by the entire GOP corporate machine (Rush, Fox, etc.)--was as much of a statement as Republicans could make. The money people in the GOP hate him. And I mean hate him. You know, because he raised taxes to give healthcare to poor children.
I know, I agree. What a dick.
Seriously, his economically populist campaign and willingness to be the only "major contender" to criticize Bush's foreign policy, calling it arrogant, turned out to be a turning point for him. Additionally, another anti-establishment candidate hated by the GOP cocktail crowd, but aparently loved by Independents also sick of our current regime, Ron Paul, got 10%.
So together, Paul who fully repudiates Bush foreign policy and Huckabee who fully repudiates Bushenomics combined for 44% of the vote in a Republican caucus! Yes, almost half of the GOP or GOP-leaning Independents chose to reject one or another key plank of Bushism.
This is about as clear as it gets. No matter what the overpaid, over-primped, over-caffeinated pundits say, this is the real story here. Sorry Stu Rothenberg.
I'll end with a quote from the song from which I stole the title of this post:
And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations
They're quite aware of what they're going through.
Will it continue? I don't know. But more participation in our system can only be a good thing. So let's hope so.

Huckabee still wants war though which differs Ron Paul from the rest. I still keep my hopes for Ron Paul in New Hampshire to hopefully realize Fred Tompson is just like the other guys.
But if Huckabee hates the Bush foreign policy, then why in his website he mentions to continue the interventionist foreign policy and continue fighting in Iraq?