I usually hear this accusation when someone on the Left attacks Obama, and the Obama loyalists rush to defend him, saying the critics are motivated by race.

Consequences, meaning the things that happen as a result of what you do. Of course, one easy way to avoid worrying about those consequences is to be utterly ignorant of what is being done in our name.

And what are the consequences? He was on our side, and we killed him. Maybe no one in the U.S. knows about this, but the Yemenis sure do.

The CIA has confirmed it. The Pakistani doctor that helped our plot is in jail in Pakistan. He is considered a hero by many conservatives.

Suppose the CIA's cute little trick with the fake vaccine program in Pakistan ends up having tragic consequences? Suppose polio takes hold there and even spreads to China and other countries? Blaming the Taliban isn't going to undo the damage if that comes to pass.

or "they hate us because they hate us" in the wise words of Morning Joe Scarborough.

Actually sometimes Muslims stand up to extremists as WE kill them. For example, a Yemeni anti al Qaeda cleric named Salem Ahmed bin Ali Jaber, whom WE killed in a drone strike in February. Why isn't THAT a scandal? Why isn't Issa investigating THAT? Why isn't Lindsay Graham pounding away at THAT? Why is neither Prager nor any other RWer supposedly concerned with Muslims opposing extremism even talking about THAT? About how a Muslim urged his fellow Yemenis to stay away from al Qaeda, and WE KILLED HIM.

This blind defensiveness reminds me of Prager's defensiveness on racism. And it's morally flawed in the same way. Our country is taking actions all over the world, actions which have consequences, and Prager is fiercely opposed to considering those consequences. How is that moral? Not true of intelligence professionals, who are well aware of the reality of "blowback" as they call it.

Prager disagrees with this definition of eye-for-eye justice. He did a whole hour segment where he advocated for the common sense of eye-for-eye justice, where the offender is punished in the same way they harmed their victim. He called it the "purest form of justice".

oops, i forgot we are at feelings-based Townhall.com ;-)

Reagan, "Why I'm for the Brady Bill". 1991 NYT Editorial. It is there at the NYT website, you can see that he references his own shooting to make his case for more gun control.