A """Bipartisan""" Culture of Corruption?

I don't know what's more pathetic about this whole issue. Is it:

(a) Republicans' frantic and pathetic attempts to argue that as long as at least one Democrat is corrupt the problem is bipartisan?

or

(b) The fact that the Democrats are just corrupt enough to give such laughable claims the thinnest veneer of semi-demi-hemi-plausibility?

The Republicans don't seem to realize that what we're arguing about here are differences of degree--vast differences in degree. No sensible person thinks that the Democratic party--or any party--is completely clean. Angrifying though that fact is, we have no choice but to live with it. But to pretend that there is no important difference between (i) a party with a merely ordinary number of individual corrupt members and (ii) a party with a large and more-or-less systematically corrupt core is nonsense.