Two different things, if you actually bother to look things up.

Back in Sept 2003 when this first came up, Bush said (emphasis added)

Q Do you think that the Justice Department can conduct an impartial investigation, considering the political ramifications of the CIA leak, and why wouldn't a special counsel be better?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks in the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.

So, the standard was "if the person has violated the law", not what the Press is claiming. According to <a href='http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/07/moving_the_goal.html">this source, in June 2004, a reporter playing a game of "gotcha journalism", is behind what the press is claiming today.

Q Given -- given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?

THE PRESIDENT: That's up to --

Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts.

Bush's pledge wasn't what the reporter asked, and Bush didn't catch it. Gotcha journalism strikes again.

And to think, polls show that faith in the news media is very low. One can only imagine why.