When Facts Cease to Matter

It was State of the Union time again last night.  I was out having fun while President Obama stood in Congress and talked to the people he is about one year away from getting to put in his rear-view mirror forever.  No more elections, no more vetoes, he has nothing left to lose, and he spoke as diplomat and a man of integrity.  I read the entire transcript today, and of all the things he said this was what impressed me most:

But democracy does require a basic bond of trust between its citizens. It doesn't work if we think the people who disagree with us are motivated by malice, or that our political opponents are unpatriotic. Democracy grinds to a halt without a willingness to compromise; or when even basic facts are contested, and we listen only to those who agree with us.

After seven years of having his integrity and his character constantly questioned, he has the grace and insight, the diplomatic self-restraint to give his opponents quarter they never offered him.  If you are one of the people who have called our President names and bought the paranoid delusion that he is somehow out to destroy this nation of ours, that should sting a little.
I don't know how many times he has to prove his critics wrong, either with incremental and compromise laden solutions like the Affordable Care Act, or with executive orders on gun control that are simply enforcing common sense. I don't know how many statistics he needs to present: lower unemployment, 18 million formerly uninsured people now with medical coverage, and my personal favorite: Zero new land wars in Asia.
Which leads me to the almost perfect illustration that was playing itself out across the globe at almost the same moment: two navy patrol boats in the Persian Gulf are picked up in waters that are claimed by Iran.  It is a fairly consistently observable phenomenon that anything involving Iran gives hawkish types howling rage seizures.  However, over the past year, partially in the course of ironing out the nuclear disarmament deal, and partially in response to Daesh, the US State Department has been slowly and tediously trying to establish a relationship of trust with Iran.  This does not somehow mean that we, all of the sudden, are best buds.  This does not mean that when a couple of our sailors are picked up by the Iranian Coast Guard and detained that it's not a big deal.  But the Republicans jumped up and started to warmonger almost immediately: "They're testing us," "Obama is weak," "They think they can play us now," "See, they've got our kids!"
John Kerry called Iran on the phone, and as of the this morning the sailors are home safe and sound.  The facts are no more glamorous than that time your car broke down and your Dad had to come pick you up from some strangers house.  The nuclear deal can still go through, and we prove once again that talking with a phone instead of a rifle is a good thing to try.
My question is why are we so impatient with the facts these days?
When something we don't like, for instance the ACA, hits a road block, like it did in the first couple months of roll out, why do we declare it an abject failure and hold on to that opinion through nearly two years of success? Why do we look at relatively small holes in a plan and scrap the whole plan instead of just fixing the holes?
The only answer I can come up with is that ideology has become more important than data.  It is a pretty old and well attested human attribute, back in ancient times, when stuff went wrong people blamed gremlins or witches or malevolent deities instead of looking for the actual reason.  It is always easier to blame an enemy than look within yourself, even if you have to invent an enemy.
I go through this personally quite a bit, trying not to constantly see evil in those I don't agree with.  The only real antidote I have found is facts.  If I can find supportable evidence, then maybe I can see truth in something that challenges my assumptions.
So much of the criticism I hear and have heard about President Obama has had very little to do with the facts that I see. People tell me that the ACA is a disaster, but my wife (who I'm obviously biased towards) tells me from first hand experience that most people are immensely relieved, some to the point of tears of joy, to finally have access to healthcare.  I also know that the plan, as now structured, could be better, maybe much better, but what I see in Congress is an unwillingness to work out those things.  I hear that Obama is weakening our nation, but I see evidence (i.e. the Iran situation) that we are actually regaining our diplomatic integrity due to the fact that we're not playing Sheriff Shoot-em-up in some Middle Eastern version of a Spaghetti Western.  I hear that our economy is trashed, but I know that it's better off than it was in 2008 by almost every quantifiable measurement.
The truth is that nothing is perfect, but that is not Obama's fault.  When I weigh the totality of the evidence there are many ways I wish he had done more, but I can't fault him for what he actually was able to do given the level of irrational obstructionism he had to face.
Despite all that, I still "feel" better about where we are and where we're heading than I did in 2008.  Maybe I'm naive, only time will tell.