Spoiler alert: they're on the same team, and it isn't ours

This is what happens every single time: the Democrats do everything possible to "accommodate" the Republican position and then get attacked anyway (they voted in large numbers for the Iraq War in and then got attacked for being soft on Terror in 2002; they voted for virtually every Bush "Terrorism" policy and the same thing happened, etc.). Here, they did everything possible to change their bill to please Republicans and nothing is happening except full-scale GOP opposition accompanied by a constant barrage of GOP attacks against them as big-spending, reckless, wealth-transferring liberals.

Ultimately, the success of this program will be measured by whether it produces successful results, so why shouldn't Democrats use their majority to enact the policy they think is most likely to achieve that? That's true on this issue and in general.
- Greenwald

The answer to Glenn's question is that they have used their majority to enact the policy they think is most likely to achieve successful results. And that is true on this issue and in general.

The obvious next question is "what do Democrats think are successful results?" Some careful editing of the first part of the above quote might help answer that:

This is what happens every single time: the Democrats do everything possible to "accommodate" the Republican position ... (they voted in large numbers for the Iraq War... they voted for virtually every Bush "Terrorism" policy... etc.). Here, they did everything possible to change their bill to please Republicans ....

Get it?