On "The Situation Room" today, we asked viewers the following questions, and here are some of our favorite responses that we didn't get to read on air:

Should the Pope apologize for comments he made about Islam?

Yes. What in heaven's name was he thinking, using such inflammatory language encouraging a religious war?
Merryman, Paducah, Kentucky

The Pope's comments were taken out of context and as usual Islam had their feelings on their sleeves. None of the infidels has apologized to His Holiness for cracks made about Christians.
George, Roanoke, Virginia

No, I don't think the Pope should apologize for his reading of an historical text. We cannot continue to be held hostage to Muslim expression of anger over every perceived insult.
Jeremy, Corpus Christi, Texas

The Pope has no reason to apologize for his comments because they are true. Violence in the Muslim world is more rampant than in the Christian world. The Crusades were over 500 hundred years ago, it is the past.
Joe, Independence, Missouri

Would you support a third national political party headed by Colin Powell and Barack Obama?

Absolutely! These two guys have a proven track record of actions and morality. This automatically puts them at least two notches above EVERY other politician currently in office in either house of Congress or the White House.
George, Murphy, North Carolina

Jack, that's about the silliest question you've come up with. While each of the gentlemen enjoys a degree of popularity, politically they are as far apart as you can get: Obama is a liberal Democrat, and Powell a conservative Republican and one of the "spinmasters" who got us into the Iraq war.
Harold, Anchorage, Alaska

Jack, I hate to say this, but I don't think I could support anybody who would be dumb enough to run for president and get involved in this horrendous quagmire that Bush has created. All the smart people are running away!
Jim

Wouldn't it be nice to have that much integrity and intelligence? Count me in. I'll gladly be the first former Republican Caucasian in that line!
Dan, Phoenix, Arizona

Yes, yes, and yes. Boy, wouldn't that stir up all the racists in this country. I think they would do a damn good job!
Dee, Shelton, Connecticut

Jack, We would support a 3rd party led by Colin Powell. Barack Obama is yet untried and not sure if he is true!
R., Cameron, Montana

What does it mean when President Bush says interrogation of terror suspects "won't go forward" unless Congress changes the law?

It means President Bush wants to cover his butt for the current handling of detainees by getting Congress to change the laws that he has already broken.
R., Madison, Wisconsin

It means that a President who has been coddled by the partisan Congress throughout his tenure is willing to take his ball and go home unless he gets to make the rules. How childish. Statements like this speak clearly that this administration is not about protecting the American public, so much as serving their own private interests.
Scott, St. Louis, Missouri

By the way of his phrasing it sounds like a direct threat to our country. You do what I want or everyone gets it! I just hope that Congress isn't flimsy enough to buckle to idle threats such as that one.
Kendall, Charlottesville, Virginia

You can stop wondering why Bush wants to change the Geneva Convention laws. He is afraid that if the Democrats ever take control he will be tried for war crimes. That is also why his change would be retroactive to 9/11/2001.
Audrey, Florida