As my first OP (and I'm not even sure I can get my point across properly)

[whereisjustice]

46. Since you asked... I'll tell you exactly why

Hillary's Email
A critical record of United States history is contained in those email records that are maintained outside of public oversight. Public officials were never intended to be given the final authority to manage and archive US Govt. records on their own computer systems. The reasons for this should be obvious. Beyond the very real possibility that the system could be exploited or compromised by foreign intelligence services, hackers/script kiddes or opportunistic unvetted employee outside the Federal hiring system, it allows an official to cherry pick and/or delete communications that contain unfavorable information. A complete historical record of State Dept business is needed to understand what went wrong in State Dept. actions and what went right.

The fact that Republicans do it is what I call the Childhood Defense - when a child is caught playing with matches and their excuse is the bully down the street does it all the time and besides you didn't know matches were dangerous. Sure.

Spizter's Hooker
Do you want the guy whose job it is investigate corruption by public officials and/or private corporations to be compromised because of the likelihood that subjects of investigations share the same prostitutes and/or escort agency as he does? An edit, I'll add the problem of sex trafficking, a huge problem in America. If the attorney general is a regular customer of an agency that also markets women, just how blind is justice in this case?

Weiner's Sexting
It should be obvious why a married public official should not be sending pictures of his genitals to random women on the internet. Beyond the massive political liability it creates for the Democratic Party, it casts serious doubt about the senders ability to make difficult decisions. Making things worse? The upfront denials only to be met with more and more evidence. It just ends up making the man (and his defenders) completely foolish.

Body Parts
Perhaps the reason we have so many body parts in Iraq is because the character of our public officials can be reflected in their behaviors around common sense issues. In each of the above cases, our reasonable expectation is that public officials should know better. If they can't understand why its a bad idea to send pictures of their dick around the internet, then how can they be trusted to vet the evidence for war?

Irony
Now, ironically, what could be worse than the obvious ethical and moral violations? The subsequent tortured denials and outrageous spin control by overly defensive hacks and operatives attempting to "defuse" the situation. Imagine a bomb disposal unit whose only tool is a sledge hammer. That's how hapless they are.

It is always amazing to me that fellow Democrats rarely mention Bill Clinton's behavior as a possible reason why Democrats lost the subsequent Presidential election. Nope, they trot out whipping boy Ralph Nader. But there's rarely been a more punishing spectacle of denials from the charismatic charmer Bill Clinton. He gave Republicans everything they were looking for but never got until then - absurd denials, semantic arguments over the word "is" and "sex" endless hearings.

If he had handled this in different way, I have no doubt that the needed votes would have been easily obtained and the Iraq body count would have been much lower.

So there you go. With high office, comes high responsibility. It's not just a dress that gets stained, it could end up being a stain on America's credibility and reputation in the world.