Good post. I actually think what the Bush administration tried to create was not so much an adversarial relationship with the press, but a market where access was used as capital. Print things favorable to the administration and you are rewarded with greater access, print things negative about the administration and access disappears. Case in point: Helen Thomas.
A market was created where reporters had to weigh their stories against not the straight story but the capital of access. Flame the President, rightfully or wrongfully, it would compromise future access, praise the President, rightfully or wrongfully, it would gain future access.
I think this actually worked by design for much of the first term. But now they have so many outsiders in the press corps that the Administration has very few believable outlets to convey their message.
I think Bush got a lot of mileage out of this reward system. But Clinton was simply
so cocky that he thought he could convince anyone in the press pool of anything, that access to him or his ideas was far less prized. In his second term, as much as Clinton spoke, the press began to believe he was irrelevant because power shifted in congress, and finding out the story from Clinton was a non-scoop.