Why Do We Call Them Leaders?

In the comments of my post on Scott McClellan's book Chuck says, "What crap. The man has no honor. If he stayed at the White House feeling the way he claims, he was a whore." That comment hit a problem right square on the head of the nail. McClellan's book is only the most recent in a string ob books critical of the Bush Administration, and not just on a policy level, but accusing actors in that administration of everything from incompetence to malign intent. Yet somehow they never have the courage to bring these issues up while they have a job in the administration. Before this it was Ricardo Sanchez, who essentially claimed that Donald Rumsfeld willfully kept needed troops from Iraq.

So Why Didn't These People Say Anything???

Not 4 years after the fact, but at the time. That's what we elect / appoint / promote these people for. Too lead. (Alright McClellan was a functionary but still if he felt the way he claims he did why didn't he have the balls to say something or quit.)

The reason in my opinion is simple. They are trying to position themselves as foresighted and principled so that they can get write books, get an appointment, or get a talking head job. At least David Hackworth, who I have never been convinced was the soldier he claimed to be (and I am not talking about physical bravery here looking at his medals he had that in spades) had the balls to go public with his criticisms. Why didn't these guys?