Genie, I understand what you're saying, and you may be wholly or partly right. But as someone who negotiates on behalf of a government agency for a living, I know how easy it is for someone on the outside of the negotiation to disparage the efforts of those on the inside because the deal they were able to get falls short of what we might want.

Maybe Pelosi, Reid et al. are just lousy negotiators, and Democrats are generally too reluctant to "play hardball" to the extent that Republicans have. Or maybe they're better than you give them credit for (they didn't get where they are by being stupid or incompetent), but they are up against a more formidable set of constraints than you recognize. In the end, elected officials can do little without public support, and for many cultural and historical reasons that predate the current administration, the American public has been in a pretty foul, unconstructive mood lately. The Republican party is in the position currently where they don't need to offer any constructive solutions of their own; all they really have to do is stoke the pervasive anger that seems to be just below the surface of the American psyche, and obstruct whatever the Democrats are trying to accomplish. That approach to governance may not work out in the long term, but in the short term (where we all live and function) it's working pretty well for them. And that may be a bigger hurdle facing the Democrats than you recognize.

In a representative democracy, the people have the power: to give or withhold their support, to contribute or not, to vote for you or your opponents (or just stay home). And the people are fickle. In that context, having the courage of your convictions may be personally fulfilling, and it may make your committed political base love you -- but if you don't have the support/money/votes from outside of your committed base, you lose. I would still prefer for the Democrats to win, even if a total victory is out of reach.