It's not semantics at all. If one does not understand the difference between the Constitution of 1787 (and a working understanding of the Federalist Papers) and the Articles of Confederation and more importantly WHY, then one doesn't really understand USA history enough to have an educated opinion on anything pertaining to it.
Never said it was an "educated" opinion.
It's a humanistic opinion, because I know how things are elsewhere, and I know how things are in the U.S now.
To us over here, it's just frustrating how you cannot seem to understand something so obvious.
Greed and healthcare aren't compatible, and it is a human right.
Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come
Basically, they can. It doesn't happen quite as often as you might think. I suppose this might be because by the time the other party gets in power, it might have such a large of host of other problems knocking on its door that it can't bother with repealing (which never seems very impressive to the public) some old bill.
With some reforms, like the new deal reforms or the great society reforms, they become some popular and politically symbolic that undoing them is extremely risky for any politician.
It does happen though. It can be a bit like a game of table tennis.
Ah I suppose. I've heard that both parties have wanted this in one form or another for a long while, so maybe they'll be happy to sit on it after making a strong show of opposition. Or at least not have the momentum to bother overturning it.