He had 60 votes and rammed through Obamacare with them.

Not when he made that statement. He didn't get 60 votes until Specter switched and Franken's election was certified.

Again, that's one of the two ways you can get your agenda done. Have a filibuster-proof majority. Then you don't need a deal.

Because the democrats are the perfect negotiating partners, aren't they? They always act in good faith to get what they want?

Not really a relevant point. I'm not arguing whether (or if) it would be a good idea to cut a deal with the Democrats, or what the GOP would want/need in legislation to get them comfortable that they would get the benefit of the bargain.

It's that the GOP isn't missing opportunities to unilaterally pass its agenda because it's not being courageous or strong enough. They don't have opportunities to force big changes to the law without a deal, because neither party can force big changes to the law without a deal. The Democrats were only able to do that because they (briefly!) had 60 votes in the Senate. Their other successes came when they were able/willing to trim their sails far enough to cut a deal, to capture some GOP votes for a proposal.

What you're frustrated with is not a problem that can be solved by having more forceful or courageous leaders. It's a problem that can only be solved by winning 60 seats or by finding a way to get enough Democratic votes for a proposal to pass a cloture vote. Neither of which is likely to happen by demanding rigorous ideological fidelity.