Yesterday, Bush outlined his strategy in Iraq, telling cadets at the Naval Academy in Annapolis that US troops will stay in that country until Iraqis are able to take over their own security. Bush worked to frame any potential pullout as "artificial" and something "less than complete victory."

Surprisingly, the MSM presented a reasonably skeptical take on the speech noting that it was merely a response to growing criticism of Bush's policies and barrel-bottom poll numbers (See this post for the initial Bush lambasting by the AP). Many described the President's remarks as broad and lacking specifics.

The AP, for example, reports Bush "did not outline a new strategy." Rather, the speech "was intended as a comprehensive answer to mounting criticism and questions. Billed as a major address, it brought together in a single package the administration's arguments for the war."

Similarly, the Washington Post runs a front-page analysis piece that says the Bush plan "offered nothing new substantively." Moreover, adds the Post, "Bush faces enormous challenges in turning around public attitudes on the war. The American people have grown increasingly sour on Iraq in public polls, and most no longer approve of the way the president is handling the war." The speech, the Post continues, "won Bush few converts in Washington."

More over the flip: