AOC Bashes Campaign Contributions from Billionaires - 'It's Called Having Standards.' But She Took the Max From a Billionaire For Her Own Campaign

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., speaks at a news conference with Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to call for legislation to cancel all student debt, at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, June 24, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez popped onto the scene out of nowhere and started the revolution. And one of her messages since that advent: Campaigns shouldn’t be funded by the rich.

Last week, while campaigning for presidential candidate and America’s rich Uncle Bernie Sanders, the freshman congresswoman waxed on millionaires with a “B” in Venice Beach, California.

Here’s what the world-changer had to say:

“For anyone who accuses us for instituting purity tests, it’s called ‘having values.’ … It’s called having standards for your conduct, to not be funded by billionaires but to be funded by the people, which is different!”

Curiously, Alexandria took a $2700 contribution — the maximum allowed — for her own 2018 congressional upset…from billionaire Tom Steyer.

“It’s called having a bad memory, apparently. I mean, is this totally hypocritical?” Fox host Julie Banderas posed.

Watch it all here:

Former D.C. Democratic Party Chairman Scott Bolden pointed out, “It is called winning, and you can’t win without money. … Listen — money is always gonna be a part of politics.”

Yep.

To me, one of the dumbest things a politician can do is try to pit themselves against the rich, as if they’re leading a brigade to take down power (see Beto, here). Politicians are the rich and powerful. And they play with the rich and powerful’s cash (the same is even more true, of course, if socialism can be implemented).

I can’t believe any of them ever take on such a ridiculous posturing.

Perhaps that’s something about Trump that appealed to voters who were tired of the same old lines — The Donald makes no pretense: He’s rich as Midas and proud to be.

As for Alexandria and her disposition toward wealthy influence in the politics game, the topic’s far from new.

The Washington Examiner offered the following in February:

In what has become the most viewed Twitter video of any politician, Ocasio-Cortez recently played a “Corruption Game” during a House Oversight Committee hearing to call for “campaign finance reform.” In her words: “We have a system that is fundamentally broken. We have these influences existing in this body, which means that these influences are here, in this committee, shaping the questions that are being asked of you all right now.”

…

The crux of Ocasio-Cortez’ position, explained on her campaign website, is that “the wealthiest people in this country [have] the opportunity to purchase the U.S. Government,” which “discourages those who are less privileged from even considering a run.”

…

She’s a hypocrite. The same “broken system” has worked remarkably well in her favor and makes her re-election likelier with each passing day. This is the same Ocasio-Cortez who has received more than $60,000 from lawyers and lobbyists, and an additional $23,450 from the healthcare industry. Throw in over $90,000 from finance, insurance, and real estate “interests,” and we have the makings of a savvy fundraiser.

Even as she scapegoats “the fossil fuel industry” and “big pharma” for lobbying Congress, Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t appear bothered enough to turn down more than $46,000 in contributions from union officials, who support laws that benefit pro-Democrat labor unions. I guess those are the right kinds of “special interests”?

When you hear her discuss rich people buying Congress, you’re not likely to hear her bring up George Soros, Tom Steyer, or Michael Bloomberg, who flood our political system with hundreds of millions of dollars. Apparently, those interests, because they align with hers, are the right kind of “special.”

Back to Fox, Julie asked: