4:48 pm: That's the end of the press conference.

Obama wishes reporters a happy holiday season.

"See ya in 2011."

4:46 pm: "It's become a symbol. We can do just as good of a job holding [detainees] somewhere else," he says of Gitmo.

4:44 pm: Next question is on status of Gitmo closing, a major White House initiative that has not been accomplished.

Gitmo is "number one recruitment tool used by thsese jihadist organizations," Obama says.

"My administration has been as aggressive going after al Qaida as any out there," he adds.

4:43 pm: Obama: "I am persistent. If I believe in something strongly, I stay on it. And I believe strongly in this."

4:42 pm: "We need to reform this immigration system." Says we should be able to get the DREAM Act done "at minimum." Some Republicans know that this is "the right to thing to do" but think the politics "is too tough for them," Obama says. Very passionate on this issue.

4:41 pm: On children who came to the country illegally as children and cannot become citizens despite serving the U.S.: "That can't be who we are."

4:41 pm: Obama calls failure of DREAM Act "maybe my biggest disappointment."

4:40 pm: Obama says he wants to "immediately engage with Republicans" on energy policy.

4:39 pm: While we "celebrate wealth" in this country, we should also reward those who contribute to the community without getting rich, Obama says.

4:37 pm: A thriving middle class has always been "the greatest strength of America."

4:36 pm: On the tax cut deal: "Compromise by definition means taking things you don't like ... the overall package was the right one."

4:34 pm: Obama reiterates his stance on tax cuts for the wealthy despite his recent two year compromise extension with the GOP: "I don't think that over the long run we can afford a series of tax breaks for people who are doing very well."

4:31 pm: Republicans recognize that "with greater power comes greater responsibility."

4:30 pm: Obama's "evolve" line on gay marriage is similar to one he gave to progressive bloggers in October. From the WSJ:

“Attitudes evolve, including mine,” he said Wednesday in an interview at the White House with five liberal bloggers. “I think that it is an issue that I wrestle with and think about because I have a whole host of friends who are in gay partnerships. I have staff members who are in committed, monogamous relationships, who are raising children, who are wonderful parents. And I care about them deeply.”

He said he was not prepared to reverse his position at that very moment, but said he thinks a lot about the issue

4:29 pm: Next question invokes Obama's oft-quoted "car in the ditch" analogy about working with Republicans.

He says the car is out of the ditch, on the ground. The focus is no longer saving the economy from crisis, but "jumpstarting the economy" to make a dent in unemployment.

4:27 pm: Part B of question two: Should gays and lesbians be allowed to marry?

"My feelings about this are constantly evolving ... I've struggled with this," Obama says, noting that he has friends who are in strong "long lasting" gay unions.

Says he will "continue to wrestle with this going forward."

4:26 pm: Next question: What was your conversation like with Marine Corps Commandant James Amos, who opposed the DADT repeal?

Obama says he told Amos he was confident, looking at the history of the armed forces, that repeal could be managed.

He adds that he has spoken to the military service chiefs since the vote and that they have pledged to implement the policy "smartly."

4:26 pm: "What we've shown is that we don't have to agree on 100% to get things done that enhance the lives of families all across America."

4:25 pm: First question: "Are you ready to call yourself a comeback kid?"

Obama says what has happened in past several weeks "was not a victory for me, it was a victory for the American people."

The past weeks show that the two parties can "ultimately find common ground to move the country forward" despite arguments, he says.

4:24 pm: One lesson of the lame duck: "We are not doomed to endless gridlock."

He notes that there will be tough fights in the months ahead ("I'm not naive," he says) ... but hopes for "a spirit of common purpose in 2011 and beyond."

4:23 pm: He says he's disappointed in the failure of the DREAM Act and a long-term budget.

4:22 pm: Obama calls lame duck session "the most productive post-election period we have had in decades."

4:21 pm: Obama recalls that START backer Dick Lugar was his companion on his first overseas trip as a senator. You can read about Obama's relationship with Lugar in this October 2008 article on Msnbc.com.

4:20 pm: Bipartisan START vote "sends a powerful signal to the world" that Republicans and Democrats stand together on national security, says Obama.

4:19 pm: Obama hails passage of START treaty: "the most significant arms control treaty in nearly two decades."

4:18 pm: Obama: This has been a season of progress for the American people.

4:17 pm: The president just came to the podium. Says he, like many in the press corps, is "itching" to get out of town to celebrate the holidays.

4:00 pm ET: With members of Congress finally jetting off to their home states after a last-minute blast of legislative activity, President Barack Obama is getting ready for his own Hawaiian vacation. But not before he holds a year-end press conference this afternoon at around 4:15 pm ET.

The administration can now boast wins on almost all of its lame duck-agenda goals. The ink of the president's signature on a bill to repeal the 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' policy is barely dry; the START treaty won ratification by a comfortable margin just more than an hour ago; and a health bill to aid 9/11 first responders is pending final passage in the House this afternoon.

We'll be live-blogging the press conference here, so stay tuned.

From NBC's Mark Murray
So much for that inaugural dinner that then-President-Elect Obama threw in John McCain's honor in Jan. 2009.

McCain today voted against ratification of the New START treaty, which means that -- outside of the war in Afghanistan and the tax-cut deal -- the Arizona senator didn't support a single major Obama White House policy in 2009 to 2010.

It's in contrast to Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, who voted for the stimulus.

It's in contrast to Lindsey Graham, who voted to confirm both of Obama's Supreme Court nominees.

It's in contrast to Scott Brown, George Voinovich, Mark Kirk, Lisa Murkowski, and John Ensign, who voted to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

And it's in contrast to Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker, Judd Gregg, Thad Cochran, Mike Johanns, Johnny Isakson, Dick Lugar, and Bob Bennett, who voted for START's ratification.

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and Mark Murray
By a bipartisan 71-26 vote, the Senate just ratified the New START nuclear arms-reduction treaty with Russia, providing the Obama administration with yet another victory during this lame-duck session of Congress.

Said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, who spearheaded the treaty through the Senate:

This historic Senate vote makes our country safer and moves the world further away from the danger of nuclear disaster. The winners are not defined by party or ideology. The winners are the American people, who are safer with fewer Russian missiles aimed at them, and who benefit knowing that our cooperation with Russia in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and supplying our troops in Afghanistan can be strengthened.

Some color: During the vote, many senators were shaking hands and some even exchanging hugs. This was the last time many will be on the floor together -- as the defeated and retiring said their goodbyes.

*** UPDATE *** Per NBC's Ken Strickland, 13 Republicans voted for ratification: Lamar Alexander (TN), Judd Gregg (NH), Bob Corker (TN), Thad Cochran (MS), Johnny Isakson (GA), Dick Lugar (IN), Susan Collins (ME), Scott Brown (MA), Mike Johanns (NE), George Voinovich (OH), Olympia Snowe (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and Bob Bennett (UT).

From NBC's Political Unit
The Tea Party had an impact in 2010 with the midterm elections. What can we expect in 2011? Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro discuss whether the Tea Party power will remain.

Thanks to former Political Unit intern Ellie Hall for her question via Twitter.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Don't forget to submit questions for upcoming Boiler Room segments. Write questions below, post them on our Facebook page, or tweet them @NBCFirstRead or @mmurraypolitics or @DomenicoNBC.

Edited by Alexandra Moe. Video was shot by Alexandra Moe and Ali Weinberg.

After days of stalemate, the Senate has passed a health bill to aid 9/11 first responders -- without a single "no" vote.

The bill passed by a voice vote or "unanimous consent."

The upper chamber took up the measure after New York Democrats brokered a deal with GOP senators who objected to the legislation's cost and the process by which it was written.

It will now go to the House for final passage. Sources tell NBC News that Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is negotiating with the GOP right now about how quickly the bill can get on the House floor. A final vote is expected in the House late this afternoon or early this evening.

NBC's Luke Russert contributed.

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and Carrie Dann

UPDATED 1:44 pm ET: A deal has been reached to pave the way for Senate passage of a health bill to aid 9/11 first responders.

Some GOP senators, led by Tom Coburn, R-Okla., had been blocking quick passage of the bill over objections about its cost and the process by which the legislation passed through Congress.

But after negotiations led by New York Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, the impasse appears to have been broken, possibly setting up the last legislative action of the 111th Congress this afternoon.

"The Christmas Miracle we've been looking for has arrived," the New York senators said in a statement. "Over the last 24 hours, our Republican colleagues have negotiated in good-faith to forge a workable final package that will protect the health of the men and women who selflessly answered our nation's call in her hour of greatest need."

It's now expected that no objections will be raised that could slow down or kill passage.

The agreement reduces the total cost of the bill, closes the compensation fund after five years, and limits attorneys fees.

"I'm pleased the sponsors of this bill agreed to lower costs dramatically, offset the bill, sunset key provisions and take steps to prevent fraud," Coburn said in a statement.

The bill must be approved by the House (which has remained in session in hopes of the chance to approve the measure) before going to the president for signing.

From NBC's Jim Miklaszewski
As President Barack Obama signs legislation to roll back the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy, Pentagon officials still don't have a clue how long it will take to implement the repeal and lift the ban on gays and lesbians openly serving in the military.

The law itself says the repeal will not take effect until Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen and the President himself certify the military's readiness.

But before that certification, the Pentagon needs to come up with a plan for implementation to deal specifically with issues such as housing and benefits for same-sex partners, the rights of gays and lesbians (particularly in the area of enlistment or re-enlistment), and an education and training regimen for all servicemembers.

While the law itself does not lay out a timetable for those plans, Gates has suggested that it could take as long as a year.

There also appears to be no desire among Pentagon officials to slap a moratorium on enforcement of Don't Ask Don't Tell pending that implementation and certification process.

In October, Gates imposed new more stringent procedures for enforcement of the ban -- which many in the military already consider a de facto moratorium.

The Pentagon doesn't know if any new DADT cases have been referred up the chain of command since then.

However, Pentagon officials and the service chiefs have made it clear to servicemembers that until certification, DADT remains the law. Anyone who openly declares they are gay or lesbian could be subject to separation from the service -- at least as of now.

Bloggers on the left and right responded to Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour’s statement today walking back his comments on the Civil Rights era.

NRO’s Jim Geraghty linked back to a 1982 New York Times article that quoted Barbour making a racially-charged joke:

But the racial sensitivity at Barbour headquarters was suggested by an exchange between the candidate and an aide who complained that there would be ''coons'' at a campaign stop at the state fair. Embarrassed that a reporter heard this, Mr. Barbour warned that if the aide persisted in racist remarks, he would be reincarnated as a watermelon and placed at the mercy of blacks.

Geraghty considered Barbour’s recent comments in the Weekly Standard along with the “watermelon” statement, as well as several other comments made throughout his career.

Will this settle the issue? Perhaps it ought to, at least for the holiday season, and until Barbour makes a decision on a presidential bid.

But if Barbour runs, we will hear a great deal about the word "watermelon" and how it was used and why. He and his campaign had better be ready to handle the inevitable questions, fair and unfair, and predictable media firestorm. No presidential candidate wants to deal with this sort of thing when there are major, pressing issues facing the nation that they would rather discuss. But then again, most presidential candidates aren't quoted using the term in the New York Times.

On the liberal end, Daily Kos’ Joan McCarter noted that bloggers on the right seem to have dialed back their own defense of Barbour, suggesting that his comments may be enough to prevent mainstream Republicans from gathering behind a Barbour presidential bid.

Oh, right. African Americans were persecuted (but that was then, right? Mississippi is a bastion of equality, now). He almost forgot that part in his rewriting the history of Yazoo City in the 1950s. Will it wipe away Barbour's long history of glorifying the South's racist past? Probably not. Judging by how the Right ended up turning on him, and turning fast, they're apparently not ready for such blatant racism becoming the face of the GOP. They prefer a much quieter dog whistle.

Balloon Juice’s John Cole is “stunned” by the following Barbour commnent:

In interviews Barbour doesn’t have much to say about growing up in the midst of the civil rights revolution. “I just don’t remember it as being that bad,” he said.

Wrote Cole:

Everyone seems to be focusing on the Citizen Council and the other race hate groups of the day, but for me, but when I hear him say it wasn’t that bad, I just can’t get past wanting to scream “BECAUSE YOU’RE F***ING WHITE, A**HOLE.”

Sweet jeebus. The Holocaust wasn’t that bad for Hitler, either. Until the very end.

The Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen said the statement smelled purely of damage control, as the remarks were “wholly at odds with what he told the Weekly Standard, which, as a prominent Republican magazine, doesn't have any reason to misquote him or twist his words out of context.”

The second is that Barbour's chief spokesperson, hoping to defend his boss, took a slightly different line than the governor did yesterday. This makes today's statement look more like spin and crisis management than a sincere clarification.

And finally, let's also not forget that the published remarks became so instantly inflammatory this week precisely because of Barbour's atrocious record on racial issues. Today's statement more or less makes the right points, but it's not as if the governor has earned the benefit of the doubt when it comes to diversity and respect for minority groups.

The Senate stepped closer to approving the START treaty Tuesday, with 67 senators voting to tee up a final vote to ratify the nuclear arms pact before Christmas Eve.

The procedural vote to break a GOP filibuster on the bill needed 60 votes to move forward. Final ratification will require two-thirds of the senators present.

Several Republicans whose support for the treaty had been in question announced their intention to vote for ratification during the day.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden were present on Capitol Hill for the vote.

A final vote is expected later Tuesday or Wednesday.

After coming under fire yesterday for his remarks about the civil rights movement, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour has issued a statement to clarify his recollections of "Citizens Council" groups and segregation in the South.

Barbour said that the council groups were "indefensible" and called segregation "a difficult and painful era for Mississippi."

Here's Barbour's full statement:

“When asked why my hometown in Mississippi did not suffer the same racial violence when I was a young man that accompanied other towns’ integration efforts, I accurately said the community leadership wouldn’t tolerate it and helped prevent violence there. My point was my town rejected the Ku Klux Klan, but nobody should construe that to mean I think the town leadership were saints, either. Their vehicle, called the ‘Citizens Council,’ is totally indefensible, as is segregation. It was a difficult and painful era for Mississippi, the rest of the country, and especially African Americans who were persecuted in that time.”

In the article in the Weekly Standard released yesterday, Barbour described a distinction in his hometown between the "Citizens Council" organization and the Klu Klux Klan. "Where I come from it was an organization of town leaders," he said. "In Yazoo City they passed a resolution that said anybody who started a chapter of the Klan would get their ass run out of town. If you had a job, you’d lose it. If you had a store, they’d see nobody shopped there. We didn’t have a problem with the Klan in Yazoo City.”

Speaking about the height of the civil rights movement in the piece, Barbour said, "I just don’t remember it as being that bad."

The comments drew skewering from historians, who noted that the Citizens Councils were anti-integration entities founded in opposition to the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954.

From NBC's Luke Russert
In his last pen-and-pad session with Capitol Hill reporters as House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said that not moving quickly enough on the issue of health-care reform was his biggest regret of the 111th Congress. That delay, Hoyer believes, is what caused Americans to see Democrats as being preoccupied with another issue besides the economy and thus contributed to their electoral defeat this past November.

Said Hoyer:

What I regret beyond a sort of general scope is that we did not address the health-care bill quickly on the House side while the Senate kept negotiating. Those negotiations took a very long time, and within that context the American people got the impression that we were not focused on what they believed to be the number one issue -- and that was jobs. I will remind you that we started with jobs in January of '09; we ended with jobs. We passed other jobs throughout the course of 2010. But the health-care debate was protracted by the Senate believing that they were going to get some sort of bipartisan agreement. Republicans in the Senate were not going to have it.

Hoyer also mentioned that obviously he regretted losing the majority but looked forward to working with the GOP to find common ground on issues like tax reform and fiscal responsibility. The soon-to-be minority whip also mentioned that keeping the Democrats' sweeping health-care reform law funded will be a key part of his job in the 112th Congress.

The AP breaks down the announcement from the U.S. Census Bureau:

Texas gained four House seats and Florida picked up two, while New York and Ohio each lost two seats in the new census count... Other winners included Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington. They each gained one seat.

States losing one seat each were Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Bottom line: States that John McCain won in 2008 picked up a net six congressional seats, while states that Barack Obama won in 2008 lost a net six congressional seats.

Looking ahead to the 2012 presidential race, if Obama wins every state he won in '08, his Electoral Vote total would be 359 -- instead of the 365 he won two years ago.

Of course, if 2012 turns out to be a blow out, these six electoral votes won't matter.

But if the race is close -- a la 2000 -- then these six electoral votes could be decisive.

From NBC's Ken Strickland
With a flurry of additional announcements this morning, there is now enough support from Republican senators to ratify the New START treaty, dealing another lame-duck session victory to the Obama administration in the final days of the 111th Congress.

GOP Sens. Bob Bennett of Utah, Johnny Isakson of Georgia, and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee announced today that they will back ratification, which requires approval by two-thirds of the senators present.

Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee is also expected to announce his support for ratification on the Senate floor later today.

Republican Sens. Richard Lugar, Susan Collins, Scott Brown, Olympia Snowe, and George Voinovich have also stated that they will vote to approve the treaty.

Democrats needed to pick up at least nine GOP votes to ratify the nuclear arms treaty with Russia (assuming that all Democrats vote in support as expected.)

Over the weekend, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that he would vote against ratification, saying that the Democrats have "jammed" Republicans by forcing the vote shortly before Christmas.

A cloture vote on the treaty is expected this afternoon, with final passage as early as tomorrow.

Msnbc.com's Carrie Dann contributed.

From NBC's Mark Murray
With an approval rating in the teens, Congress right now is about as popular as Julian Assange at the State Department's Christmas Party -- or Sarah Palin at The Nation's editorial meeting, or President Obama at a Federalist Society convention.

And, politically, the Democratic-controlled Congress took a beating from voters in November, as Republicans won back control of the House and picked up seats in the Senate.

But lost in the poll numbers and the voters' message in November is this one unmistakable fact: This Congress, which likely will come to a close this week, accomplished more, legislatively, than any other Congress since the 1960s (the Great Society) or the 1930s (the New Deal).

In the past two years, it has:
-- expanded the safety net with the health-care law;

-- invested billions in the nation's roadways, airports, schools, and green technologies with the stimulus;

-- reformed the nation's financial system with financial reform;

-- passed billions in tax cuts for Americans with the stimulus and the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts

-- expanded civil rights with the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don't Tell."

And in its final piece of business, the Senate is currently working on one of the White House's top foreign-policy goals: ratification of the New START treaty with Russia. Then throw in all of the other legislation enacted this Congress, like credit-card reform and the Lilly Ledbetter anti-pay-discrimination act.

"I would probably rank the New Deal [Congress] first," congressional scholar Norm Ornstein told First Read. "I think this one edges the Great Society. It is at least on par with the Great Society."

"For all the dysfunction, it was just astonishing what they were able to get done," Ornstein added.

Many can take credit for these accomplishments. President Obama (who spent his political capital on these legislative items, especially health care). Democratic leaders (who had to placate everyone in their party from Bernie Sanders on the left to Ben Nelson on the right). Democratic members of Congress (many of whom cast tough votes). And, at least on the tax-cut deal, congressional Republicans (who bucked growing conservative resistance to the legislation).

What's more, these accomplishments will likely have staying power. While Republicans campaigned, at least in part, on rolling back the agenda passed these past two years, they won’t find doing so easy as long as Democrats remain in the majority in the Senate and the president wields veto power. (However, it appears that the U.S. Supreme Court will have the final say about whether one of the key components of the health-care law is constitutional.)

Of course, the Democratic-controlled Congress biggest failure was losing 63 House seats -- the most since the 1940s -- and control of that chamber, as well as losing six Senate seats.

Yet as we -- and others -- have pointed out before, political power in Congress comes and goes. What truly matters is what you do with it when you have it.

Besides President Obama, which politicians will be the most influential in 2011? Plus, who are the potential GOP dark horse presidential candidates to watch?

A special thanks to Frank “Grimey” Grimes for submitting this question!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Don't forget to submit questions for the Boiler Room segments next week. Write questions below, post them on our Facebook page, or tweet it, to @NBCFirstRead or @mmurraypolitics or @DomenicoNBC.

Edited by Ali Weinberg. Video was shot by Alexandra Moe and Ali Weinberg.

Earlier, we clipped a Washington Post article noting that nine GOP senators are committed to -- or leaning toward -- voting for the New START treaty. And Democrats need exactly nine Republican votes to ratify the measure.

Those nine: Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Scott Brown, George Voinovich, Robert Bennett, Bob Corker, Dick Lugar, Johnny Isakson, and Judd Gregg.

Now, per NBC's Ken Strickland, another Republican says he's backing the treaty: Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander.

So that's 10 sure or possible yes votes.

It appears the New START treaty is gaining momentum ahead of today's test vote to end Senate debate on the measure.

Per NBC's Ken Strickland, today's vote is expected to get to 60 required to break the filibuster. But it remains unclear if there are the 67 votes -- and thus nine GOP votes -- needed to ratify the treaty in a separate vote later in the week.

The Washington Post: "On Monday, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) declared he would vote for it. Asked whether Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah) would support the pact, spokeswoman Andrea Candrian said, 'Yes, he's planning on it.' Sen. Johnny Isakson (R.-Ga.), a Foreign Relations Committee member who supported the pact in committee and spoke in favor of it on the floor, told the Hill newspaper on Monday that it 'sounds like' he will vote in favor of ratification."

More: "Four other Republican senators have publicly backed New START - Richard G. Lugar (Ind.), Olympia J. Snowe (Maine), Susan Collins (Maine) and George V. Voinovich (Ohio). Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) told reporters that he was leaning toward supporting the treaty. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said Monday that he has not made a decision yet but that it appeared 'the caveats that I've laid out are going to be dealt with.'"

So that's nine GOP votes.

The New York Times adds, "Treaty supporters pressured wavering Republicans on Monday with an appeal by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the nation’s top military officer, to approve the agreement. 'Ratification of the New Start treaty is vital to U.S. national security,' Admiral Mullen wrote in a letter to the Senate. 'Through the trust it engenders, the cuts it requires, and the flexibility it preserves, this treaty enhances our ability to do that which we in the military have been charged to do: protect and defend the citizens of the United States.'"

Today's other big political news: The U.S. Census population totals, which will determine which states pick up congressional seats over the next 10 years and which states will lose seats. Here's MSNBC.com's Tom Curry: "According to an estimate done in October by the demographic firm Election Data Services, states either certain or likely to lose seats in the House include Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Massachusetts and Iowa."

"According to Election Data Services, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Washington would gain seats, with Texas picking up as many as four."

This could have an impact on the 2012 presidential race, of course. "Notice that of the eight states cited above as likely to gain representation — and thus gain electoral votes — President Barack Obama won only three of them: Nevada, Washington and Florida."

From NBC's Courtney Kube
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is continuing her campaign to get the new START treaty ratified, making calls to members on both sides of the aisle on the Hill today.

State Department spokesperson PJ Crowley said that he is confident that the votes are there in the Senate to ratify the treaty, and that Secretary Clinton will continue to answer senators' questions until the treaty passes.

"We have been at this for many months. We believe that we've answered questions," Crowley said, adding, "It's time for the Senate to step up and for votes to be counted."

Crowley said that members of Congress did have legitimate questions and concerns about START throughout this process, but that the State Department has already answered those questions at this point, and now politics has taken over.

"Any objections at this point are more about politics than substance, and that's regrettable because it's contrary to the history of strong bipartisan support or arms control treaties going back decades," Crowley said.

If he runs for president, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) would present a powerful contrast to President Obama.

While Obama is famously cool and wonkish, Barbour is a gregarious back-slapper; while Obama is tall and lean, Barbour is short and stocky; and while Obama campaigned as an outsider in '08, Barbour -- a former D.C. lobbyist and RNC chairman -- is the classic Washington insider.

The question, however, is whether the white Republican from Mississippi might be too much of a contrast to the nation's first African-American president. Because if he runs -- and if he's the GOP nominee -- race would be an obvious storyline.

And it's a storyline in the Weekly Standard's profile of Barbour.

In interviews Barbour doesn’t have much to say about growing up in the midst of the civil rights revolution. “I just don’t remember it as being that bad,” he said. “I remember Martin Luther King came to town, in ’62. He spoke out at the old fairground and it was full of people, black and white.”

Did you go? I asked.

“Sure, I was there with some of my friends.”

I asked him why he went out.

“We wanted to hear him speak.”

I asked what King had said that day.

“I don’t really remember. The truth is, we couldn’t hear very well. We were sort of out there on the periphery. We just sat on our cars, watching the girls, talking, doing what boys do. We paid more attention to the girls than to King.”

Liberal-leaning Talking Points Memo also catches Barbour praising Citizens Councils in Mississippi in the profile.

Both Mr. Mott and Mr. Kelly had told me that Yazoo City was perhaps the only municipality in Mississippi that managed to integrate the schools without violence. I asked Haley Barbour why he thought that was so.

“Because the business community wouldn’t stand for it,” he said. “You heard of the Citizens Councils? Up north they think it was like the KKK. Where I come from it was an organization of town leaders. In Yazoo City they passed a resolution that said anybody who started a chapter of the Klan would get their ass run out of town. If you had a job, you’d lose it. If you had a store, they’d see nobody shopped there. We didn’t have a problem with the Klan in Yazoo City.”

While the Citizens Council movement denounced the Klan's violence, it was a group that protested desegregation policies after Brown v. Board of Education.

This holiday season, what gifts could Santa bring President Obama that would shake up his presidency? One hint: none of them would fit in a stocking.

Special thanks to newdayDAWNING10 for the question!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Don’t forget to submit questions for the Boiler Room segments next week. Write questions below, post them on our Facebook page, or tweet it, to @NBCFirstRead or @mmurraypolitics or @DomenicoNBC.

Edited by Alexandra Moe and Ali Weinberg. Video was shot by Alexandra Moe and Ali Weinberg.

Tomorrow, the U.S. Census Bureau will release its population totals and determine which states gain congressional seats and which states lose them in the next decade.

Late last week, the Cook Political Report's David Wasserman previewed what to expect from this reapportionment, which also will impact the 2012 electoral map.

For some states, there isn’t much suspense. Georgia, Nevada, and Utah are all but certain to gain an additional seat in the House, while Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania are all but certain to lose a seat and Ohio is all but certain to lose two seats. However, much like NCAA basketball teams anticipate Selection Sunday, some states are “on the bubble” and won’t know how many seats they will have until Tuesday. According to population estimates released by Election Data Services’ Kimball Brace, the ten states in contention for the “last five” seats in the House (in order of likelihood to make the cut) are South Carolina, Florida, Minnesota, Washington, Texas, New York, California, Arizona, North Carolina, and Illinois.

While South Carolina, Washington, California, and North Carolina are all in the running for one additional seat, Minnesota and Illinois are fighting just to preserve their current totals. The big winner, Texas, will gain either three or four new seats. Florida and Arizona will either gain one or two new seats. And New York will lose either one or two of its current seats.

From NBC's Mark Murray
After passage of the tax-cut deal, as well as the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," ratification of the New START arms-reduction treaty with Russia represents the final legislative drama during this lame-duck session of Congress.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has scheduled a vote to end debate on treaty for Tuesday. That needs 60 votes to pass, which appears to be a given.

The uncertainty, however, is over ratification, which will need 67 votes -- so at least nine GOP votes -- and that action will come sometime after the vote to cut off debate.

One Republican who won't be voting for ratification is Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who said yesterday: "I think the verification provisions are inadequate and I do worry about the missile defense implications of it... I think if they'd taken more time with this -- rushing it right before Christmas, it strikes me as trying to jam us. I think if they'd taken more time --I know the members of the Foreign Relations Committee spent a lot of time on this but the rest of us haven't."

But the White House says it was never counting on McConnell's vote. "We respect Sen. McConnell's view, but weren't surprised by it, and we certainly weren’t counting on his vote," said White House spokesman Tommy Vietor.

Democrats remain optimistic they have the votes needed for ratification, as Vice President Joe Biden said on "Meet the Press" yesterday.

But make no mistake, the effort won't be easy.

From Jim Miklaszewski
Opponents of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy are celebrating today's Senate vote to dismantle the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military, but the actual repeal of the law could take up to a year to go into full effect.

In its present form, the bill states that repeal will not take effect until 60 days after Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen and President Barack Obama "certify" that the U.S. military is prepared for implementation.

Secretary Gates has predicted that the process of certification could take up to a year.

So what happens next?

Under the expected procedure, the Defense Department will conduct servicewide training and education for all active duty, reserve and national guard forces, and make whatever adjustments in procedures and facilities are necessary. Only then would Gates and Mullen certify the military is prepared to implement the repeal.

During that process, the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel would also issue a servicewide memo instructing any gay or lesbian servicemembers not to openly declare their sexual orientation because they could potentially be subject to separation from the military.

The reality is, however, that under the more stringent guidelines for enforcement of the law implemented in October, there have been no servicemembers discharged from the military. So it would be unlikely that anyone would be forced out of the military during the certification process.

Msnbc.com's Carrie Dann contributed.

From Carrie Dann and Ken Strickland
Last week, when the Senate failed to move forward on a bill that would have phased out the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, it looked like the end of the road for advocates of repeal.

But on Saturday, a GOP filibuster of the legislation was broken by a wider-than-anticipated margin, with six Republicans joining 57 Democrats to push forward a bill to end the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the U.S. military.

Backers of the repeal pulled off a last-minute legislative maneuver to separate the repeal from a larger Defense Authorization bill, which contained other controversial items that drew GOP criticism. That standalone bill passed the House last week and won the approval of GOP holdouts in the Senate who had objected to Democrats’ handling of debate over the defense funding measure.

Ultimately, Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, George Voinovich of Ohio, and Mark Kirk of Illinois voted for repeal.

One Democrat who opposes repeal of the ban, newly-elected Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, did not vote on Saturday.

Thirty-three Republicans opposed the motion to move forward on the bill.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a leading opponent of repeal, warned shortly before the vote that “elites” would celebrate the end of “DADT” without understanding its consequences for the armed forces.

During the debate over repeal, McCain pointed to the concerns of some military commanders that a change in the policy during wartime could jeopardize the cohesion of combat units.

“I hope that when we pass this legislation that we will understand that we are doing great damage,” he said. “And we could possibly – and probably – as the Commandant of the Marine Corps said … harm the battle effectiveness that is so vital to the survival of our young men and women in the military.

The full repeal is now expected to easily pass the Senate this afternoon. It will then have to be “certified” by the Pentagon and the White House before going into effect.

A measure that would have offered provisional legal status to some adults who came to America illegally as children failed to advance in a Senate vote Saturday.

Democratic backers of the legislation fell short of the 60 votes to move the DREAM Act legislation forward. Democratic Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jon Tester of Montana, Max Baucus of Montana, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, and Ben Nelson of Nebraska voted against bringing the bill to the floor; Republican Sens. Richard Lugar, Lisa Murkowski, and Robert Bennett voted for it.

The vote was 55-41.

The DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act would have allowed illegal immigrants with a high school diploma or a GED to apply for conditional U.S. status if they are under the age of 30 and arrived the U.S. before the age of 16. After a long process -- including two years of service in the military or enrollment in college -- they would then have been eligible to apply for legal immigrant status.

Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, who led GOP opposition against the legislation, called the measure “amnesty” and argued that it "incentivizes" illegal immigration. GOP opponents also noted that it would have allowed some illegal immigrants with criminal records to gain citizenship.

Advocates of the measure tried to target senators from states with high Latino populations, saying that the DREAM Act would reward hard work by young adults who were brought to the United States by no fault of their own.

Majority Leader Harry Reid originally scheduled a vote on the legislation last week but abruptly postponed it in favor of taking up the House's version of the bill during the final days of the lame duck session.