Until you ask that question you aren't doing your job as a reporter.

Now that is funny!

If they were actually reporters, you would know that it is being paid for by (courtesy of real reporters at NRO) ......

the House bill is paid for by, among other things, extending the federal pay freeze, reforming government-employee pensions, introducing modest means-testing to Medicare, and stepping up (sadly necessary) efforts to prevent millionaires and illegal immigrants from improperly receiving government checks. Such reforms should hardly be controversial, let alone a cause for which Senate Democrats are willing to make 170 million American taxpayers suffer.

Instead, you cluelessly fall for the liberal media packaging and framing of the debate, oblivious to the fact that the House bill is even funded, much less funded in a bipartisan way that provides what Obama wants - a full year extension - not a 2 month kick of the can.

Nope, it is not about the people for the libs - it is for framing the Repubs as the problem.

After all, what else does Obama have to run on?

"Nope, it is not about the people for the libs - it is for framing the Repubs as the problem"

Actually, no one has to frame Republicans. They eat their own quite well! ObamaCares 2012.

Actually, no one has to frame Republicans.

They do if Obam is to have snow ball's chance. He can not run on his record.

They eat their own quite well

I thought you guys are always saying the repubs are lock-step together? Does Norquist tell everyone to eat their own now?

You guys are really pretty funnny .... pathetic .... but funny.

ObamaCares 2012.

Wrong again.

ObamaCaresOnlyAboutObama 2012

No, it's about the majority of the American people being tired of being S-H-I-t on by business and being taken advantage of by the Republican party.

- being s-h-i-t on: jobs, jobs, jobs.... all the good jobs are being sent overseas. Middle class wages have been stagnant over the past 20 years if not decreasing by over 10%. All the while, the wages paid to the top 1% have been exponentially rising.

- We have been being taken advantage of by smooth talking politicians who are able to sell a mis-represented bill of goods to the american people. People are stupid in general, the GOP has taken advantage of this stupidity to provide themselves with tax breaks while pushing the costs down to the American middle class in the form of regressive taxation.

The GOP needs to get the messsage of they will cease to exist.

. People are stupid in general,

Yea, especially the clueless ones that don't even realize the wealth gap was flat under Bush and has grown each year under Obama.

The real GINI index king of the last 30 years is Clinton.

Too bad you didn't know that, huh?

Ana - You do realize that the payroll tax cuts are temporary, right?

A simple "is it right to sacrifice benefits for the poor, sick, elderly and disabled to protect the 300,000 wealthiest Americans from an inconsequential tax increase?"

Nice to see that you are looking on the discretionary side of the issue that would be over a ten year period, yet the funding will only last a year.

BTW - what benefits are being lost to the poor, sick, elderly and disabled with the pay roll tax cuts?

Rob - at least you got this right...

We have been being taken advantage of by smooth talking politicians who are able to sell a mis-represented bill of goods to the american people

Been going on for years by both sides, the right doesn't own this.

As a youngster I thought LBJ's war on poverty and creating a great society would be such a good thing. As I grew up I realized that the politicians real aim was only thinking to the next election

Then go home and return in January with a united House-Senate strategy that forces Democrats to make specific policy choices that highlight the differences between the parties on spending, taxes and regulation.

To the WSJ -- "the specific policy choices that highlight the differences between the parties" have already been made clear. The Teapublicans don't want the tax holiday for the middle class, and if there is to be a tax cut for the middle class, then it must be paid for (unlike tax cuts for the rich). The GOP/TP want to pay for the tax holiday by cutting jobs, freezing wages, and slashing UE for the working class thereby defeating the purpose of the tax holiday. Instead the Dem's want a small surtax on a small number of rich so the working class can get a small break for a small time until the economy recovers. What's new? And we already know a majority of Americans agree with the Dems.

So that takes care of spending and taxes. How about regulation? How this applies to the payroll tax holiday is unknown, unless we talk about the unrelated Keystone pipeline and inevitable spill and who will be responsible for clean up and how.

But you forgot another very important difference WSJ -- the Dems standing for The People by protecting safety nets, like unemployment insurance. The GOP has been trying to chip away at all entitlements for a long time whether Paul Ryan's privatization of Medicare, or Teapublicans trying to cut Social Security though this is not a factor in deficits, and now they are trying to "reform" unemployment, most notably requiring drug tests.

Yes, let's highlight this, because this IS Big Government. Not just in terms of liberties and injecting government into private life, but in terms of adding a program at a cost. This has already been tried by Gov. Rick Scott in Florida, and it FAILED miserably. Only 2% tested for drugs, which is way below the national average of 5%, leaving Florida tax payers to pick up the tab for the 98% of drug tests passed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To any ill-informed conservatives: The reason a "conference" is being rejected -- not only by the Dems, but also by McConnell and Republicans in the Senate -- is because the two-month extension was; 1) passed with a bipartisan vote of 89 out of 100 senators, a bipartisan vote this large that has not occurred in a long time, 2) everyone knows if the vote had been allowed in the House it would have passed, and 3) the "conference" is a sad gimmick for House leaders to try to save face, and possibly more diabolical by which Tyranny of the Minority would try to "jam their laws down our throats."

I say possibly diabolical because five (5) of the eight (8) members Boehner appointed to the conference have openly stated they don't want the tax cut at all. But this business of a minority ultra conservative group that represent only 5% of the country dictating to the rest of congress and America what will or will not be by circumventing our constitutional democracy MUST end NOW.

So here it is folks, either Boehner waves the white flag or prepare yourselves for a Republican Tax Hike. Brilliant--We should have the Teapublicans thrown out of office in no time!

Bob,

I'd love to see the "facts" that you utilize to base your statements upon. I'm sure they are skewed, flawed and ultimately misrepresented. Please provide specifics to the group that are relavent to the big picture, not simple some individual peripherial statistic that is manipulated to try to reinforce their side. My guess is that you wont be able to provide such "facts". I'm sorry, I know that Pubes don't believe in facts, they would rather place faith in beliefs and opinions.

The Pubes are not stupid, thay have the money, represent the money, and ultimately seek to protect the wealth. Why do you think they've implemented the Grover pledge. The problem is, Americans are beginning to get wise to these antics.

The ABSURD Tom Coburn?

The ABSURD Marco Rubio?

The ABSURD Mitch McConnell?

Disparaging the majority of REPUBLICAN Senators, who believed they had a deal and got blind-sided/screwed by their own in congress shows a political naivety that is almost precious...

Don't be fooled. This has less to do with the tax cut and more to do with the House repubs wanting the Keystone Pipeline written into the bill.

That's why it's a 2 month bill - so the issue will be taken up again after the first of the year.

Don't ignore that fact the bill passed in the senate 89-10. Placing the entire blame on Harry is stupid.

Dangerfield - remember what happens when one "assumes"

NoJoe

How do you think Senate Republicans, especially Sen Rubio is feeling about his comrades in the house?

How do you see this playing out?

This way, dangerfield

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/200309-payroll-processors-lobby-against-short-term-tax-cut

Note that the testimony was taken Monday- after the Senate had adjourned.

Seems that the "side effects" from the prescription were a little too dire to ignore- by raising costs to businesses, this could actually cut jobs.

The democrats in both the House and Senate should immediately dispatch their "team" to reconcile the two bills. Get it done for a year, since that seems to be what people are determined should happen.

I'm pretty sure it's the democrats who want the issue alive to flog for as long as possible.

By the way- I owe you an apology. Last week, you believed I accused you of being part of the Libs R Us team- and nothing could be further from the truth. It was, however, my poor writing that led you to believe that, and for that, I do apologize.

I do wonder, though- are you backing Obama?

The house Republicans blind-sided the Senate, and no amount of spin can reverse the majority who voted for it in the Senate. Coburn, Rubio, McConnell et al got screwed by their own. This is the sort of clusterf&%$k the democrats have been famous for. This is as big a screw-up as the Republican leadership has made all year and it comes at the wost time possible...

Is Minority leader McConnell on record as wanting to return? Where are Senate Republicans on this?

Are you backing Romney?

...and you accused me of being "back on the team" which is still a chuckle...I couldn't believe you of all people would say that. I don't have a Jersey in either color...;)

I probably am backing Romney- who is a little more socially conservative than I would like, but certainly more fiscally conservative than Obama.

I don't think the Senate had the information the House got on Monday. So, we're they blindsided? Sure- they should have looked into the ramifications before the vote, not waited to see what might happen later.

Republicans have named their "team" to reconcile the bill- Pelosi and Reid have not. Ball's in their court.

Happy holidays to you and yours.

Oops- my bad. Boehner has named his negotiators.

http://thehill.com/video/house/200613-boehner-our-negotiators-are-here

Is Minority leader McConnell on record as wanting to return? Where are Senate Republicans on this?

If you're waiting for McConnell to provide cover for the House TP'ers after they stuck a knife in his back, I think you're going to have a long wait. He's a good party loyalist, so he may come to their rescue eventually, but not before he lets them twist in the wind for a while. I can't stand the guy, but he's as shrewd a political operator as they come, and if a bunch of political newbies make him look foolish, they will pay for it.

Think it went something like this;

Mitch- So John, we're voting this thing up; Everything ok on your end?

John- Looks like it's a done deal here, just a question of herding cats, haha, you know who I mean...

Mitch-Well, make sure our ducks are in a row here, I'm sticking my neck out on you word...

John-Don't sweat it, just hold up your end and get out and home to your family...don't worry...

Merry Christmas NoJoe...to you and yours...

"Nope, it is not about the people for the libs - it is for framing the Repubs as the problem"

Actually, no one has to frame Republicans. They eat their own quite well! ObamaCares 2012.

Bob-

That's what they call and EDITORIAL, which means it's OPINION...not reporting, the actual reporting says...

The dems have already won the narrative...and it is because the house Republicans screwed their Senate brethren who only voted for the thing because they were assured they had a deal...

Bob-

self-editing? Good for you!

dangerfield,

You got me, those guys were "editors" as opposed to "reporters."

Still, are the facts they used in their editorial not the same facts?

Does it change the context or point?

Regardless, good technical catch.

Regarding the Senate legislation, it is still crap even though the repubs went with it .... same ole kick-the-can routine .... no?

And really, what plan would you prefer?

Thanks for your comment dangerfield.

Have a Merry Christmas.

Opinion vs reporting is not a technicality...So the same is true for the New York Times Editorial page?

Opinion is opinion. The same facts are used by both sides in a debate or trial, it is the marshaling of those facts around a conclusion that marks the difference between REPORTING and EDITORIALIZING.

Merry Christmas...

Obama cares? Only as far as being re-elected goes.

I incorrectly identified them as reporters, not editors.

In the above, their statement as to how it is paid for is correct and factual, there is no opinion.

The bold print is opinion which reflects on those facts.

I'm sure you can separate the facts vs. opinion above.

Oh dear, Republicans not talking to each other ... was that a senate Democrat giving high fives? It's close to Christmas, so Hand, do not Slap talk today.