But four in 10 Americans surveyed say they could vote for the Alaskan for president – with just 19 percent saying they would be “very likely” to vote for her should she run, and another 24 percent saying they’d be somewhat likely to do so.

The Gallup Poll’s Jeffrey Jones suggests that this offers Palin ” a decent reservoir of potential support to build upon. ”

At the same time, 41 percent of those surveyed this week in the wake of Palin’s surprise Fourth of July weekend resignation say they would be not at all likely to vote for her. And 13 percent say they’d be “not too likely” to vote for her.

As a benchmark on this question, consider what Gallup asked in 2005 about Hillary Clinton running for president: 52 percent of registered voters surveyed said they were at least somewhat likely to vote for her, including 28 percent who said they were very likely to do so.

“Predictably, most Democratic registered voters (70 percent) say they are not at all likely to vote for Palin,” Gallup reports. “While most Republican registered voters (72 percent say they are likely to vote for Palin, only about half of these (35 percent of all

Republican voters) can be considered solid supporters who say they are very likely to support Palin at this time.”

Should Palin shy away from a bid for the White House, Gallup’s Jones notes, “her high profile may allow her to take on a role as a major national political figure. When asked about her possibly having such a role, 39 percent of Americans say they would like to see her do this, including 67 percent of Republicans, 34 percent of independents, and 18 percent of Democrats.”

If Palin has positioned herself at odds with the national news media, a lot of people also think the governor has gotten poor treatment. The survey shows that 53 percent see the news media’s coverage of Palin as “unfairly negative,” while just 9 percent say it has been “unfairly positive” and 28 percent say “about right.”

The survey of 1,000 adults was conducted Monday and carries a possible margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent.

“Well, no, I don’t think it would be fair to say it was half,” the president told an interviewer for Sky News. “You know, I never lived here. I didn’t visit until I was in my mid-twenties. But I think that it is a source of inspiration, it’s also a place that, because of my familial connection you know, I think I feel very personally when I think about children who aren’t getting opportunities, when I think about the problems of HIV/AIDS, or issues of corruption. These are things that people I know, family members of mine, have experienced. It’s not something I see in abstract terms.”

Obama also was asked by the British interviewer, Adam Boulton, if the first African-American president represents a “post-racial America.”

“I don’t use that term,” Obama replied. “Just because it somehow implies that the door is closed to any issues related to race. And I just don’t think that’s true. But I do think there is no doubt that my election signifies extraordinary progress, progress that my grandparents or Michelle’s grandparents could have never have imagined.”

The president also visited Cape Coast Castle in Ghana with his young daughters — the colonial era castle housed dungeons where Africans were held for the trans-Atlantic slave trade – and had this to say in a public statement after the visit:

“You know, I think it was particularly important for Malia and Sasha, who are growing up in such a blessed way, to be reminded that history can take very cruel turns, and hopefully one of the things that was imparted to them during this trip is their sense of obligation to fight oppression and cruelty wherever it appears, and that any group of people who are degrading another group of people have to be fought against with whatever tools we have available to us.”

The castle stop came up in the interview as well. Here, courtesy of Sky News, is the transcript of Political Editor Adam Boulton’s interview with the president in Ghana:

ADAM BOULTON: Mr President thank you for talking to Sky News both in Britain and of course in many countries in Africa. Could I ask you first of all, as the ‘first son of Africa’, if you like, to be President of the United States, how does it feel to be paying your first visit as President to Africa?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well obviously the welcome in Ghana has been extraordinary. People have been gracious and so thoughtful. To be able to bring my children here and to experience, for example, this castle and to understand that particular story of the African Diaspora, I think is something that will stay with them for a long time. And hopefully the message we’re also sending is that the United States is committed to Africa. We want to be a partner, not to dictate how Africa moves forward but to be there in a relationship of mutual responsibility and mutual respect.

AB: I mean what does Africa mean to you? Is it half of you?

OBAMA: Well, no, I don’t think it would be fair to say it was half. You know, I never lived here. I didn’t visit until I was in my mid-twenties. But I think that it is a source of inspiration, it’s also a place that, because of my familial connection you know, I think I feel very personally when I think about children who aren’t getting opportunities, when I think about the problems of HIV/AIDS, or issues of corruption. These are things that people I know, family members of mine, have experienced. It’s not something I see in abstract terms.

AB: Yet sometimes reading your first book and also even listening to you today talking about corruption, there’s a degree of impatience to a certain extent.

OBAMA: Well I think that’s right. There is impatience. You know my general attitude is that there is just so much promise here. I remember the first time that I travelled as a U.S. Senator to Kenya, we had our American press pool with us and some of the reporters came back to me and said, you know we were talking to people on the streets and it’s amazing how well informed these folks are and they’re up on not just Kenyan politics but U.S. politics. And I said you’re right, these are folks of extraordinary talent and capacity. And the problem is that they don’t have institutional structures that allow them to thrive. And it is up to governments and leaders to, not do for people, but to give them the opportunity where if they work hard and are willing to put in some sweat that they can succeed. And not enough of that has been done here…

AB: Yeah there’s Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe, corruption, despotism.

OBAMA: Yeah. And at some point despite the tragic history of Africa, we have to say that the days of colonialism are over, that Africa has the resources and the talent necessary to move forward and it’s time to go ahead and get things done. And for those of us in the West, I think our obligation is to on the one hand say we are committed to working with you and we will provide you assistance where possible. But it’s got to be a mutual responsibility to lift up the continent.

AB: You mention colonialism. It’s been alleged that you don’t like the Brits because what they did to your grandfather.

OBAMA: Yeah, I’ve always been curious about this allegation. I love the Brits! And I think I’ve shown my affection every time I’ve travelled there but yeah, I think this is an example of Fleet Street trying to sell newspapers.

AB: But also, I mean, there must be some resentment in countries that were —

OBAMA: Well, no, I mean look, the notion that somehow I would judge countries at this point based on what happened a hundred years ago is not something that would make much sense.

AB: Can I ask you on the other front, we’re here at a slave fortress at which many Africans Americans started their journey to America and I think your own wife has said she can’t trace her family, she didn’t know how they got there. We saw you going round with your children, your family. Pretty sombre experience for you all.

OBAMA: Well sombre but I think instructive. I’m glad my children came because part of what I try to communicate to them is that slavery, like the Holocaust, like other instances of extraordinary cruelty, can happen anywhere, any place, and is usually rooted in one group of people asserting superiority over another group of people. And I want them to learn very early how dangerous that mindset can be. And to fight against it.

AB: What should the fact of slavery, I think you called it the United State’s original sin once, what should that mean to African Americans today?

OBAMA: Well, I think that it is important to understand that history and not paper it over. On the other hand I think it should be a source of great inspiration for black and white Americans…that we have been able to overcome so many of the remnants of slavery. Not all. We still have instances of discrimination. There are still structural inequalities that grew out of the history of slavery and discrimination…

AB: Do you represent post-racial America?

OBAMA: Well…I …rarely…I don’t use that term. Just because it somehow implies that the door is closed to any issues related to race. And I just don’t think that’s true. But I do think there is no doubt that my election signifies extraordinary progress, progress that my grandparents or Michelle’s grandparents could have never have imagined.

AB: Just one final question on Africa…suggestion coming that actually if you look at the amount of aid flowing in, if you look at even the optimistic, what’s going through Congress at the moment, proposals on climate change…they won’t go nearly far enough to save this continent.

OBAMA: Well, you know, Africa is often troubled but always resilient. And I think that we have to, in the West, on issues like climate change, take seriously our obligations – our carbon footprint is far larger than the African carbon footprint is. And we’re already seeing some effects here in Africa from a warming planet. So we’ve got a special obligation, but I’m confident that as difficult as it is, working together, that we can not just save Africa, but save ourselves.

AB: And the bill – is it enough?

OBAMA: Well, the…it is the first step in what will be a long journey.

AB: Moving on to Afghanistan…the United States has paid a much higher price in lives in both Iraq and Afghanistan, than Britain. You’ve had more troops there. Yet this week, there have been 15 deaths in fewer days and the number of British military killed in Afghanistan now exceeds Iraq. A growing number of people at home who are just saying we haven’t got this mission right, perhaps we don’t have the strength or the support that we need. What do you say to that?

OBAMA: Well first of all, my heart obviously goes out to the families of those British soldiers. And Great Britain has played an extraordinary role in this coalition. Understanding that we cannot allow either Afghanistan or Pakistan to be a safe haven for Al Qaeda. Those who would, with impunity, blow up train stations in London or buildings in New York. And so we’ve got a core mission that we have to accomplish. We knew that this summer was going to be tough fighting, that there was an interest in the Taliban exerting control, they have I think been pushed back, but we still have a long way to go. We’ve got to get through elections. The most important thing we can do is to combine our military efforts with effective diplomacy and development, so that Afghans feel a greater stake and have a greater capacity to secure their country. And post-election, once the election’s taken place in September in Afghanistan, I think we need to start directing our attention to how do we create an Afghan army, an Afghan Police. How do we work with the Pakistanis effectively, so that they are the ones who are really at the forefront of controlling their own countries.

AB: You’ve been speaking to Gordon Brown. Have you been asking him to strengthen the force in Afghanistan?

OBAMA: You know we had a conversation early on while I was still doing a review, to make sure that I had his insights and ideas about how to approach this. We think that the British have made an extraordinary contribution. I think that all of us are going to have to do an evaluation after the Afghan election to see what more we can do. It may not be on the military side. It may be on the development side providing Afghan farmers alternatives to poppy crops, making sure we’re effectively training a judiciary system and a rule of law in Afghanistan that people trust. So there are a whole range of ways that coalition members are going to be able to —

AB: But do you need the British forces? I mean you’ve taken over from them in Basra, you’ve now leading the mission in Helmand.

OBAMA: Well look, the contribution of the British is critical. This is not an American mission. The mission in Afghanistan is one that the Europeans have as much, if not more, of a stake in than we do. Certainly the Afghans as well as the Pakistanis have more of a stake than we do. The likelihood of a terrorist attack in London is at least as high, if not higher, than it is in the United States. And that’s the reason why Tony Blair and Gordon Brown and others have made this commitment. It’s not because they wish to put their young men and women in harm’s way, it’s because of a recognition that we’ve got a serious fight on our hands and we’ve got to deal with it smartly, but we’ve got to deal with it effectively.

AB: Final question because I am keeping you from Air Force One, President Assad last week invited you on Sky News to start negotiating face to face and to go to Syria. Are you going to accept that invitation?

OBAMA: Well, you know I think that we’ve started to see some diplomatic contacts between the United States and Syria. There are aspects of Syrian behaviour that trouble us and, you know, we think that there is a way that Syria can be much more constructive on a whole host of these issues. But, as you know, I’m a believer in engagement and my hope is that we can continue to see progress on that front.

AB: Thank you very much for engaging with us.

OBAMA: Thank you, I enjoyed it.

In an Op-ed essay appearing in newspapers today, the president says this of the $787-billion economic stimulus plan enacted in February: “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was not expected to restore the economy to full health on its own but to provide the boost necessary to stop the free fall.

“So far, it has done that. It was, from the start, a two-year program, and it will steadily save and create jobs as it ramps up over this summer and fall. We must let it work the way it’s supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity.”

Yet something is missing in this piece, the most recent of a series of Op-ed articles that Obama has signed since his inauguration, the way the Senate minority leader’s office sees it:

“Noticeably absent from the president’s op-ed on the stimulus today are the words “save or create 3.5 to 4 million jobs,” Don Stewart of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office notes.

“In their place, a new definition of success for the stimulus: “it will steadily save and create jobs as it ramps up over this summer and fall.” Just “jobs” not “millions of jobs?” Stewart writes this morning, “Oh, and apparently, the stimulus was only supposed to provide “the boost necessary to stop the free fall.”

This is the text of the president’s Op-ed essay:

“Nearly six months ago, my administration took office amid the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression. At the time, we were losing, on average, 700,000 jobs a month. And many feared that our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

The swift and aggressive action we took in those first few months has helped pull our financial system and our economy back from the brink. We took steps to restart lending to families and businesses, stabilize our major financial institutions, and help homeowners stay in their homes and pay their mortgages. We also passed the most sweeping economic recovery plan in our nation’s history.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was not expected to restore the economy to full health on its own but to provide the boost necessary to stop the free fall. So far, it has done that. It was, from the start, a two-year program, and it will steadily save and create jobs as it ramps up over this summer and fall. We must let it work the way it’s supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity.

I am confident that the United States of America will weather this economic storm. But once we clear away the wreckage, the real question is what we will build in its place. Even as we rescue this economy from a full-blown crisis, I have insisted that we must rebuild it better than before. For if we do not seize this moment to confront the weaknesses that have plagued our economy for decades, we will consign ourselves and our children to future crises, sluggish growth, or both.

There are some who say we must wait to meet our greatest challenges. They favor an incremental approach or believe that doing nothing is somehow an answer. But that is exactly the thinking that led us to this predicament. Ignoring big challenges and deferring tough decisions is what Washington has done for decades, and it’s exactly what I sought to change by running for president.

Now is the time to build a firmer, stronger foundation for growth that not only will withstand future economic storms but that helps us thrive and compete in a global economy. To build that foundation, we must lower the health-care costs that are driving us into debt, create the jobs of the future within our borders, give our workers the skills and training they need to compete for those jobs, and make the tough choices necessary to bring down our deficit in the long run.

Already, we’re making progress on health-care reform that controls costs while ensuring choice and quality, as well as energy legislation that will make clean energy the profitable kind of energy, leading to whole new industries and jobs that cannot be outsourced.

And this week, I’ll be talking about how we give our workers the skills they need to compete for these jobs of the future. In an economy where jobs requiring at least an associate’s degree are projected to grow twice as fast as jobs requiring no college experience, it’s never been more essential to continue education and training after high school. That’s why we’ve set a goal of leading the world in college degrees by 2020. Part of this goal will be met by helping Americans better afford a college education. But part of it will also be strengthening our network of community colleges.

We believe it’s time to reform our community colleges so that they provide Americans of all ages a chance to learn the skills and knowledge necessary to compete for the jobs of the future. Our community colleges can serve as 21st-century job training centers, working with local businesses to help workers learn the skills they need to fill the jobs of the future. We can reallocate funding to help them modernize their facilities, increase the quality of online courses and ultimately meet the goal of graduating 5 million more Americans from community colleges by 2020.

Providing all Americans with the skills they need to compete is a pillar of a stronger economic foundation, and, like health care or energy, we cannot wait to make the necessary changes. We must continue to clean up the wreckage of this recession, but it is time to rebuild something better in its place. It won’t be easy, and there will continue to be those who argue that we have to put off hard decisions that we have already deferred for far too long. But earlier generations of Americans didn’t build this great country by fearing the future and shrinking our dreams. This generation has to show that same courage and determination. I believe we will.”

Almost another half a million jobs in the US economy were lost in the month of June, pushing the unemployment rate to 9.5 per cent – the highest in 26 years and still growing.

Mr Obama says he was deeply concerned as American families with jobs now wonder if they are next in line to lose theirs.

“Obviously we are deeply concerned about the employment rate. What we are still seeing is too many jobs lost – too many families who are worried about whether they are going to be next,” he said.

A US unemployment rate of 12 per cent by the year’s end or early next year is not out of the question, according to some economists who were shocked by today’s much worse-than-expected monthly job loss figure.

Certainly an 11 per cent unemployment rate by the end of the first quarter of next year is a distinct possibility.

There were 467,000 jobs lost in the month of June – a figure which triggered a sell-off on Wall Street, initially sending all 30 companies on the Dow into the red.

Since the recession began 18 months ago, the US economy has lost a total of 6.5 million jobs and the unemployment rate is almost double.

Today’s job loss figure also rocked faith in a modest second half of the year recovery in the US economy.

Earlier this year the Obama administration projected the unemployment rate would top out at about 8 per cent because of the trillion dollar stimulus package.

But much of that stimulus money is still in the pipeline, with less than 10 per cent of the proposed spending actually spent.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs today continued to argue the stimulus was working and the recession was slowing.

“From November of 2008 through I believe March of 2009, the average job loss for those months approached 700,000,” he said.

“In the most previous quarter, that job loss average was 436,000 so I think there is a sense that the beginnings of stabilisation are taking hold and hopefully the worst job loss is behind us.”

The numbers of people now out of work, and the effect the rising unemployment rate has on confidence, poses the biggest hurdle to recover.

Chief investment officer with Cumberland Advisers, David Kotok, says the recovery will be slow.

“I don’t know about jobless recovery but it is very slow. We take this unemployment rate into the tens and then it stays there and it comes off very, very slowly,” he said.

Jobless numbers released today reinforced the view that unemployment levels will be high not only for months, but even years to come.

Mr Obama makes his first visit to Moscow as president on Monday, with talks scheduled with his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev and Mr Putin.

The US President has used an Associated Press interview to say it is important that Mr Putin understands a Cold War approach to US-Russia relations is outdated.

“I think Putin has one foot in the old ways of doing business and one foot in the new,” Mr Obama said.

In response, Mr Putin told journalists that Russia “stands firmly on [its] feet and always looks to the future”.

Mr Putin says Moscow is waiting for Mr Obama’s visit “with very warm feelings”.

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt’s advancement.

Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world – tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars.

More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” That is what I will try to do – to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words – within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: “Out of many, one.”

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores – that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations – to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.

That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together.

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.

In Ankara, I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America’s goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

That’s why we’re partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America’s commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths – more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: “I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be.”

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq’s sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq’s democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers – for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel’s founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them – and all of us – to live up to our responsibilities.

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America’s founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It’s a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel’s legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.

The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran’s leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.

I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments – provided they govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah’s Interfaith dialogue and Turkey’s leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action – whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.

The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights.

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now let me be clear: issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.

I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations – including my own – this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities – those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.

This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.

On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.

On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek – a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God’s children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many – Muslim and non-Muslim – who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn’t worth the effort – that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country – you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort – a sustained effort – to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples – a belief that isn’t new; that isn’t black or white or brown; that isn’t Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It’s a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It’s a faith in other people, and it’s what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us, “O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.”

The Talmud tells us: “The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.”

The Holy Bible tells us, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God’s vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God’s peace be upon you.

###

Obama spoke during an afternoon celebration of his historic election, featuring musicians led by Bruce Springsteen and Beyonce as well as famous actors, all entertaining an estimated half-million people on the National Mall with songs and readings aimed at capturing the gravity of the moment.

Obama, the first African-American to be elected president, looked out at the sea of people and told them, “What gives me hope is what I see when I look out across this mall. For in these monuments are chiseled those unlikely stories that affirm our unyielding faith _ a faith that anything is possible in America.”

He gazed fleetingly at the Washington Monument in the distance. “Rising before us stands a memorial to a man who led a small band of farmers and shopkeepers in revolution against the army of an empire, all for the sake of an idea,” he said.

He looked at the World War II memorial down the mall, “a tribute to a generation that withstood war and depression, men and women like my grandparents who toiled on bomber assembly lines and marched across Europe to free the world from tyranny’s grasp.”

And just before him, he saw the reflecting pool, “a pool that still reflects the dream of a King, and the glory of a people who marched and bled so that their children might be judged by their character’s content.”

Finally, Lincoln — “watching over the union he saved,” Obama said, “sits the man who in so many ways made this day possible.”

Remember their struggles, Obama urged the crowd, and remember the “thread that binds us together in common effort, that runs through every memorial on this mall,” and offers a lesson that “there is no obstacle that can stand in the way of millions of voices calling for change.”

Washington was crackling with energy on Sunday. The crowd chanted “O-bam-a” after his speech, and the echoes were audible several blocks away. The people sang along with Pete Seeger, Springsteen and others in a rousing chorus of “This Land is Your Land.”

Obama, staying with his family at Blair House across from the White House, began his day at Arlington National Cemetery’s Tomb of the Unknowns, where he and Vice President-elect Joseph Biden laid a wreath.

Obama then headed to the Nineteenth Street Baptist Church, one of the city’s most historic African-American churches. Organized 170 years ago, it has been an important player in the city’s cultural and religious life.

Hundreds were packed into the sanctuary when Obama, his wife Michelle, their two daughters and Marian Robinson, Obama’s mother-in-law, entered and took seats in the second row, near the altar. “God has prepared you and placed you,” Senior Pastor Derrick Harkins said. “God will not forsake you,” he said. “Go forward in prayerfulness and faithfulness.”

He spoke of those who turned away from what he called the “flowery bed of ease” to champion justice _ civil rights icon Rosa Parks; Nazi resistance hero Dietrich Bonhoeffer and King, whose 80th birthday is being celebrated Monday.

“Perhaps, just perhaps, you are where you are for just such a time,” Harkins said.

Sunday afternoon, Obama joined the throng at the Lincoln Memorial, site of the August 28, 1963 “March on Washington” that featured King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.

The Obamas and the Bidens sat in a glass-enclosed area to the left of the faux marble stage, and heard actor Denzel Washington open the program by noting that “we are inspired by the man we have elected to be the 44th president of the United States of America.”

Out came Springsteen, backed by a predominantly African-American choir, and they sang “The Rising,” his ode to America’s efforts to deal with the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Other readings and songs followed, as Queen Latifah recalled how Marian Anderson sang there on Easter Sunday in 1939 after the Daughters of the American Revolution refused her permission to sing before an integrated audience at nearby Constitution Hall.

Actor Samuel L. Jackson observed that “Martin Luther King did not live to see his dream fulfilled. His dream is being realized by all of us being here today.” Next came Bono of rock band U2, who said that on Tuesday, “that dream comes to pass.” Beyonce ended the two-hour event by leading everyone in “America the Beautiful.”

The crowd had gathered early on a cloudy day when temperatures stayed in the 30s, but nothing seemed to bother them.

Geoff Keough and Lauren Gaudio dressed for the occasion in red, white and blue floral leis, American flag eye masks, and for Keough, a spangled Uncle Sam top hat. They brought hot coffee.

Dawn Arrington was not happy about the long security lines, but figured it was worth the wait. “I think it’s a trial run for Tuesday,” she said of the concert and its logistical aggravations. “How could we not make it?”

City residents were grateful for Obama’s Sunday schedule. Local resident Faye Roberson said many in the capital, particularly those living in its most poverty-stricken neighborhoods, shared key elements of Obama’s biography.

“Obama can understand people trying to feed their families,” said Roberson, who has lived here for 40 years.

Sue Williams of nearby Alexandria, Va. agreed. The federal employee was heading for the Mall with her sister and parents, who had come from Massachusetts for the inauguration. They were covered in a flurry of Obama pins, hats and other paraphernalia.

“Obama can help elevate the credibility of this country around the world,” Williams said. “There’s an underlying sense of hope and optimism that I’ve never seen before.”

(Erika Bolstad and Jack Chang contributed to this story)

The new Illinois senator is expected to be sworn into office later this week.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois made the announcement in a joint statement Monday, saying Burris “is now the senator-designate from Illinois and, as such, will be accorded all the rights and privileges of a senator-elect.”

Burris, in turn, called himself honored and humbled to be the state’s newest senator. “I’m thankful for the opportunity to serve,” he said at a news conference in Chicago. “I recognize that my appointment triggered a challenging time for many.”

The development prevented the impasse that has plagued Democrats from dragging on into Obama’s inauguration festivities, and it capped a gradual retreat by the Senate’s top Democrats.

They had initially tried to dissuade Blagojevich, who faces criminal charges, from making an appointment and suggested that his pick would not be seated. Last week, Burris’ credentials were rejected in a circus-like atmosphere that tarnished the opening day festivities of the new Congress.

But Reid and Durbin said they now anticipate that Burris, a former Illinois attorney general, will be seated this week, barring objections from Republicans.

They made the announcement after Burris lawyers delivered to the Capitol documents certifying his appointment to Obama’s seat, and the secretary of the Senate determined that the paperwork met Senate requirements.

Reid and Durbin said they were satisfied both with the documents and with Burris’ testimony before the Illinois House impeachment panel that he did nothing wrong.

Even though Burris does not stand accused of wrongdoing, Senate Democrats rejected Burris last week, only to quickly backpedal after Obama himself privately weighed in and senators fretted that the situation was diverting their focus at a critical time.

In the House, the Financial Services Committee scheduled a hearing on the program in advance of legislation offered by committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., that would place tough new restrictions on recipients of the money and require spending to reduce mortgage foreclosures.

The legislation is scheduled to reach the floor of the House on Wednesday, with a vote set for Thursday.

That flurry of activity comes in the wake of President George W. Bush’s decision Monday to act on Obama’s behalf and ask Congress for access to the remaining $350 billion of the money Congress authorized to rescue the nation’s financial sector.

The request reached Congress as lawmakers and Obama also were assembling a spending and tax-cutting stimulus package of $800 billion, or possibly more.

“It is clear that the financial system, although improved from where it was in September, is still fragile,” Obama said Monday.

Bush’s notification set a 15-day deadline for Congress to disapprove of the request. The Bush administration’s handling of the money has met bipartisan criticism in the House and Senate. Lawmakers have complained that the Treasury Department’s use of the money has been muddled and misleading, that recipients of the funds have faced little accountability and that the program has done nothing to reduce home foreclosures.

If the Senate rejects a motion to disapprove the funds, it would pave the way for Obama to begin dispensing the money about a week after he assumes office Jan. 20.

Congressional Democrats said they hoped Obama’s desire to place greater restrictions on the money and broaden its goals to loosen more credit would build support among otherwise skeptical lawmakers. The House tentatively scheduled a vote for next week. If both chambers refuse to release the money, it would be up to Obama to issue a veto — a dramatic first act by a new president — in hopes that Congress would not override him.

The request by the Bush White House made it clear that the money was to be used by the incoming Obama administration. It directed lawmakers to a letter Monday from top Obama economic adviser Larry Summers that vowed to make significant changes in the way the program is administered.

In the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he was encouraged by Obama’s efforts to add more conditions and to require greater accountability for the use of the money. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., voiced skepticism but left open the possibility that he could be persuaded.

“I would be hard-pressed to support additional funding for the TARP without sufficient assurances this money will not be wasted, misspent or simply used for more industry-specific bailouts,” McConnell said.

Summers’ letter, however, was not as detailed as the legislation proposed in the House by Frank. That bill would set new conditions on the institutions that receive the money, requiring limits on executive pay and an end to owning or leasing private jets. It also would require spending at least $40 billion from the fund on foreclosure mitigation.

Financial services industry lobbyists said they opposed a provision in Frank’s bill that would allow the Treasury Department to apply executive pay restrictions to banks that already have received government money.

Scott Talbott, senior vice president at the Financial Services Roundtable, said the group would like to see Congress’ concerns addressed without the retroactive provision. The Roundtable represents 100 of the largest banks and insurance companies, including such government fund recipients as Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Some lobbyists hoped Summers’ letter would reassure lawmakers and make legislation such as Frank’s less likely to pass. Summers’ letter doesn’t address the question of retroactive limits on executive pay.

At the same time, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. issued a directive Monday asking banks and other financial institutions to track how the federal money or guarantees they received helped them boost “prudent lending” and efforts to help at-risk borrowers avoid foreclosures.

___

Associated Press writers David Espo, Chris Rugaber and Marcy Gordon contributed to this report.

By turns wistful, aggressive and joking in his final news conference, Bush covered a huge range of topics in summing up his eight years in the White House — the latest in a recent string of efforts to have his say before historians have theirs.

Then the White House said he would do it again Thursday night in a final address to the nation.

Reaching back to his first day in office, he recalled walking into the White House and having “a moment” when he felt all the responsibilities of the job landing on his shoulders.

Barack Obama will feel that next week, he said, his tone gently understanding. [More...]

Indeed, he was full of supportive words for Obama — the nation’s first black president — and talked of being deeply affected while watching people say on television that they never thought they would see such a day, many with “tears streaming down their cheeks when they said it.”

“President-elect Obama’s election does speak volumes about how far this country has come when it comes to racial relations,” Bush said, seeming almost awe-struck.

He brushed off any suggestion that he’d found the job of president too burdensome — or that Obama would find it so. “It’s just pathetic, isn’t it, self-pity?” he said. “And I don’t believe that President-elect Obama will be full of self-pity.”

At the same time, Bush showed his skin is not so thick as all that. “Sometimes the biggest disappointments will come from your so-called friends,” he advised Obama. Bush’s former press secretary, Scott McClellan, released a scathing tell-all book last year that still stings around the West Wing.

Asked one last time by reporters about the major controversies of his presidency, Bush had a ready answer for each:

• On the dismal economy he leaves behind for Obama, Bush said, “I inherited a recession, I’m ending on a recession. In the meantime, there were 52 months of uninterrupted job growth.” The 2001 recession began in March, two months into his presidency, but economists agree the seeds were sown long before.

Bush also defended himself against economic attacks from his own party on the huge government bailout of Wall Street financial firms. He said, his voice rising, “If you were sitting there and heard that the depression could be greater than the Great Depression, I hope you would act, too, which I did.”

• On the five-year-old Iraq war, the issue that will define his presidency, Bush said history will judge his actions but it is a fact that violence diminished and everyday life became more stable after his decision in 2007 to send an additional 30,000 American troops into the fight.

• He vigorously took issue with critics of the federal response to Katrina, the hurricane that devastated New Orleans. Gesturing and speaking with feeling, he said, “Don’t tell me the federal response was slow when there were 30,000 people pulled off roofs right after the storm passed,” he said. “Has the reconstruction been perfect? No. Have things happened fairly quickly? Absolutely.”

• The president claimed progress toward peace in the Middle East, though any hopes for an accord soon have been dashed by, among other things, a bruising offensive by Israel in the Gaza Strip.

• Most angrily, Bush dismissed “some of the elite” who say he has damaged America’s image around the world. “No question, parts of Europe have said that we shouldn’t have gone to war in Iraq without a mandate, but those are few countries,” he said.

The president’s actions after the Sept. 11 attacks — such as establishing the prison for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, approving tough interrogation methods that some say amount to torture and instituting information-gathering efforts at home decried by civil rights groups — were compounded by global outrage at the 2003 invasion of Iraq, particularly later when the alleged weapons of mass destruction that were the main justification for war turned out not to exist.

“In terms of the decisions that I had made to protect the homeland, I wouldn’t worry about popularity,” he said.

Asked about mistakes, Bush cited a few that he preferred to term “disappointments” — not finding those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the abuses committed by members of the U.S. military at the Abu Ghraib detention center in Iraq, giving a speech two months after the start of the Iraq war under a “Mission Accomplished” banner on an aircraft carrier, Congress’ failure to pass free-trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, and the negative tone in Washington that belied his 2000 campaign promise to be a “uniter not a divider.”

But he offered no evidence he takes personal responsibility for any of those failures. The only two areas where he seemed to acknowledge that errors in judgment had been his were his penchant for cowboy rhetoric, such as saying “Bring ‘em on!” to foes in Iraq, and his decision to pursue partial privatization of Social Security immediately after his 2004 re-election.

He said arguing for immigration reform would have been a better use of the political capital he earned through his victory, in part because lawmakers were not yet convinced that Social Security presented an imminent crisis. Over two years of intensive efforts, Bush achieved reform in neither area.

Bush, who watched a Republican drubbing last fall, gave his party advice about how to rise from the ashes. Referring back to the divisive immigration debate, in which conservatives blocked broad changes and raised concern that illegal immigrants would be given amnesty, Bush said the image of his party that resulted was “Republicans don’t like immigrants.”

“This party will come back. But the party’s message has got to be that different points of view are included in the party,” he said.

Bush began what he termed “the ultimate exit interview” Monday with a lengthy and gracious thank-you to his core of usual reporters, calling many by name and saying he respects their work even if he often dislikes the product.

Looking to his first day out of office, Bush appeared somewhat flummoxed but also relieved at the prospect of waking up at his Texas ranch next Wednesday with, by his own admission, little idea what to do beyond bringing coffee to his wife.

Monday’s news conference offered only one bit of news, and — in these times when Bush has seemed to fade from office a little more each day — even that was overtaken by events.

He said he would ask Congress to release the remaining $350 billion in Wall Street bailout money if Obama wants him to — but that Obama had not yet asked. A mere two hours later, Obama had made his request to Bush, and the White House said the president had agreed.