Why are Dems getting defensive over Rove comments?

I had a point to ponder today. Came up with it all my own, too! I was so proud of my moment of brilliance and observation that I watched Beavis & Butthead Do America for the 923rd time just to bring myself back to my juvenile reality.

OK, Dems got really torqued at comments that Rove made about liberals. From NewsMax:

White House adviser Karl Rove should either apologize or resign for saying liberals responded to the Sept. 11 terrorist strikes by wanting to "prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," Democrats said Thursday.

Apparently the same sentiment was not shared by Dems when it came to Durbin's comments. They said he shouldn't resign or apologize...but he apologized (sorta) anyway. But I digress...

Bush's chief political adviser, Rove said in a speech Wednesday that "liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers." Conservatives, he told the New York state Conservative Party just a few miles north of Ground Zero, "saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."

Emphasis mine. Righteous indignation was shown by Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Chuckie Schumer, Frank "The Lout" Lautenberg, and Howard Dean. They screamed for Rove's head.

There's just one problem. Rove didn't say "Democrats", did he? He said "liberals"! Whether we agree with his statement or not, I find the aforementioned Dems' defensive remarks intriguing because...well, because these Dems (like most in elected positions) pretend like hell that they aren't liberal! So if they claim to be non-liberal, why should they care about Rove's comments about liberals, hmmmmmmmmm? I mean, I'm from Tennessee, but if you spoke poorly about rednecks, I wouldn't get defensive because I'm not a redneck! So this tells me that the Dems in question are indeed liberals, which is fine...so long as they'd just admit it's who they are!