Both scenarios reflected different aspects of poor leadership, just in different means to an end. I think you're overstating the relative benefit of negligence of perjury, perhaps because I wasn't clear enough in my earlier post: A failure is a failure, whether active or passive. This is what I was trying to highlight at the end of my post with the STD example.
But most troubling is why you'd make the statement about political party at the end, unless you're attempting to just make an inflammatory, off the cuff, remark and belittle the entire political party, perpetuating party line stereotypes. It only seems to accomplish perpetuating the perception that republicans are unwilling to be constructive and to have real discussions due to political party affiliation.
It's akin to Putin's Op-Ed piece, where he listed some valid concerns but ended on diminishing US's exceptionalism. All it accomplished was drawing attention away from his comments.