From Howard Kurtz's Media Notes:

But imagine that you're a casual viewer in Kansas City or Orlando or Phoenix. You hear the president talk about Sept. 11, how Saddam was a threat, how battling terrorism is a tough task, how he will do whatever it takes for America to prevail, how he doesn't like seeing dead bodies on television either but his responsibility is to remain resolute. You haven't heard him say this 20 times, like the journalists have. You see a plain-talking president sticking to his guns. You don't think it's reasonable to blame a guy who'd been in office for eight months for 9/11.

And you wonder whether the press is unfairly trying to trap him.

Check out some of these regional headlines, helpfully compiled by The Note:

Philadelphia Inquirer: "Bush Says Iraq Is Testing America's Will."

Pittsburgh Post Gazette: "Bush: U.S. won't waver on Iraq"

Kansas City Star: "Bush Speech Relieves, Frustrates Iraqis" and "Bush Says Iraq Is Testing America's Will"

Detroit Free Press: "QUESTIONS ON THE WAR: More troops, resources will be sent if requested"

Orlando Sentinel: "Bush must clear up exit strategy"

Miami Herald: "Bush: 'Iraq is testing America's will' "

St. Petersburg Times: "Bush promises to finish job in Iraq"

Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "Bush: 'We must not waver' on terror or Iraq"

Arizona Republic: "Bush gives no ground to his critics in speech"

Manchester Union-Leader: Bush: "U.S. will finish job in Iraq"

Not exactly the portrait of a stumbling president.

So, what press is beating up on Bush? Is Kurtz's point that "elite" DC press looks for some things, while the rest of the country's press adores the steadfastness of Bush? Still not getting it...