already explained most of the details of what's been going on over the last couple of days. And Steve Benen has more why no one should take Kingston or any of the rest of them seriously on these "conferees." -- What the GOP conferees have in common:

Now that House Republicans have rejected the Senate’s bipartisan compromise on a payroll tax-break extension, the next step, apparently, is moving forward with the conference-committee charade. It’s a joke intended to fail, but House GOP leaders have begun going through the motions.

To that end, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said this afternoon he’s chosen eight House Republicans to work on negotiations — which probably won’t occur — with the Senate. The DCCC noted that most of them have already announced their opposition to extending the payroll tax cut at all.

Rep. Dave Camp (MI-04). “I’m not in favor of that. I don’t think that’s a good idea.” [The Hill, 8/14/11]

Rep. Kevin Brady (TX-08): “I am not as big a fan of the payroll tax cuts…” [Bloomberg News, 12/14/11]

Rep. Tom Price (GA-06): “It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.” [NPR, 9/8/11]

Rep. Renee Ellmers (NC-02): “it’s not the answer … these tiny little feel good measures. We don’t need more gimmicks.” [CNN, 11/30/11]

The DCCC actually missed one: Rep. Tom Reed (R-N.Y.) was also named to the conference committee, and just two weeks ago, he falsely claimed the payroll tax break is a “threat to Social Security.”

Why would the House GOP leadership choose conferees to work on the details of a tax cut who already oppose that tax cut? They wouldn’t unless the point was to set up the committee to fail.