I can sorta see how Bush became DCI, however -- it's all down to Gerald Ford. Bush and Ford had served together in the House, and Ford actually short-listed him as a VP candidate prior to picking Rockefeller. They both served in the Navy, on carriers, during WWII. Bush had international experience (e.g., "ambassador" to China). The DCI job at the time required a savvy political hand, which Bush definitely had, and he could work with Ford on that basis.
Panetta's selection is far more puzzling, but perhaps understandable if one accounts for Obama's psychology. I suspect that Obama primarily wanted a reliable party apparatchick in that position who would serve him personally. "Apparatchick" certainly does describe Panetta's role in the Clinton administration.
It doesn't seem to be turning out that way, though ... which again raises my initial question of what's making Panetta loyal to the CIA.
I guess it will bear watching, to see if something more obvious begins to develop....
Fair enough on Bush, but at the time, I do remember people being surprised that a guy from the diplomatic wing became DCI. But Bush, as you mention had some international exposure, both in China, at a critical time in nascent US China relations and at the UN.
The DCI post has always needed political savvy, and that partly accounts for Panetta’s appointment.
But, Panetta didn’t even bring in a modicum of international experience, having been a domestic policy type guy all his political career.
It’s the first thing that hit me when I heard about the appointment. FWIW.