Lopsided Political Outrage

These days it seems, the political scene is as divisive as ever. When it comes to elections, many people seem to vote one way or the other across the board. To Republicans, all democrats have become super liberal socialists. To Democrats, all republicans are vast right wing warmongers. If you're a democratic representative at any level it is expected by the party that you support the party despite your own ideals, and the same goes for republican lawmakers as well.
Especially the republican party....If you go too far towards the middle you are labeled as a liberal hiding in the Republican party, or a RINO (republican in name only).
On the individual level, and granted this is the bias of an independent conservative, it seems that democratic voters will defend their party to the death. Obama, for example, despite early on his campaign was nothing but positive sounding rhetoric, without substance in any way shape or form, people were ecstatic about having him as the next President of the United States. And yet, despite any positive things Bush has actually managed to accomplish, they would rather dismiss it witha comment about all the things he has done wrong (admittedly, this is many, but not worthy of cancelling out anything good).
Another example of lopsided political outrage has come in the form of corruption and scandals. (Former)Republican Representative Duke Cunningham of California gets caught accepting bribes....HUGE OUTCRY. Large Media coverage, including lots of mention among late night talk show hosts. Same with Tom Delay
Former Democratic Representative William Jefferson of Louisiana faces charges of corruption, after being videotaped accepting 10s of thousands of dollars,a nd subsequently raided by the FBI. HUGE OUTCRY....not about what he did, but that his offices (that of a sitting representative) were raided by federal authorities. Less media coverage.
Take also note of the contrasting statements about DeLay's situation with that of Jefferson, by Nancy Pelosi (democrat representative from California):

After Tom DeLay was indicted on September 28, 2005, Nancy Pelosi had some very harsh words: “The criminal indictment of Majority Leader Tom DeLay is the latest example that Republicans in Congress are plagued by a culture of corruption at the expense of the American people.”

But, if you forward to yesterday, she's got a very different tone about the indictment of Rep. William Jefferson, of her own party:
“The charges in the indictment against Congressman Jefferson are extremely serious. While Mr. Jefferson, just as any other citizen, must be considered innocent until proven guilty, if these charges are proven true, they constitute an egregious and unacceptable abuse of public trust and power.

I have no problem with what she says about Mr. DeLay (it is rather true), but I disagree with the softening middle section she gives to her own party's member she won't give to Mr. DeLay.

I find it rather odd the similarity between both situations: In the face of idiocy by a republican, it is often the republicans who put more pressure on their party's member than anyone. In the face of idiocy by a democrat, it is still up to the republican party to press for action on the matter.

Now, obviously I take my vantage point from what I see within the mainstream and talk radio medias, and I don't see as many of the activities that occur on a more frequently than we know basis. But it seems to me that to attack a democrat is akin to murder, while attacking a republican is as everyday normal to people as flipping a light switch. Maybe I'm wrong, but then again this is only a somewhat informed opinion that I make. Feel free to correct me.