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:

Critics say the Pentagon is intentionally obscuring the total number of wounded in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you think that's the case?

Jack, There is a difference in the meanings of the words "wounded" and "injured." "Wounded" implies a battle. "Injured" does not. A soldier may be injured while fixing a piece of equipment. That injury should not be included in a count of the wounded. Perhaps there should be separate counts, or, if lumped together, it could be called something more inclusive.
Ron, Highland, New York

This administration, the Pentagon, and half of Congress are intentionally obscuring many, many things about these so-called wars and lying about the rest. So what's new?
Diane, Barneveld, New York

Golly, Jack, you don't think those nice people in the Pentagon would deliberately mislead us, do you? And they seemed like such nice people when they were telling us how wonderful life is in Baghdad.
Rosemary, Groton, Connecticut

Being in the military, I'd like to say that there is a huge difference between combat and non-combat related injuries. It is a constantly active career, and people hurt themselves all the time off the battlefield. If Senator Obama wants to know the next time I sprain my ankle playing football or pull a muscle lifting heavy equipment, then I'll send him a note, but that doesn't mean I was wounded in action.
Gregg, Allentown, Pennsylvania

What does it mean that Senate Republicans blocked debate on a resolution opposing the president's plan to escalate the war in Iraq?

It means that they just don't give a damn about anything except their own political agenda. They don't seem to care that while they play politics, more of our young men and women are being killed and maimed. They just don't care.
Colleen, North Platte, Nebraska

They will be voted out of office in 2008. Only we need a third party to fill the seats because the Democrats are just as bad.
Gene, Houston, Texas

It means that the Republicans believe it's more important to stay united as a political party than to stay united as a country.
Brian, Calgary, Alberta

It means that the divide between the American public and our elected officials is getting wider. They don't listen to us anymore.
Joseph, Orlando, Florida

Should members of Congress get one week off every month?

No. The last time I checked what is left of the Constitution it said that the Congress works for us. I don't know of a single, sane, company that would allow its employees a paid (or even unpaid) week off every month.
Jim, Grand Island, New York

Good Lord, Jack, what a silly question. If we gave them four weeks off a month, we'd be in a heckuva lot better shape! However, if Congress would promise to repeal one law a day, then I guess we could let them work part-time. But, no raises, no health benefits, and no retirement fund.
Matt, Mexico

Jack, I would be happy for Congress to have one week off a month; it would cut their time off by 75%.
Jerry, Jacksonville, Florida

Are you kidding me! A week off a month! They can't get things done as it is now! They make me sick!
M.

No. Most Americans who actually do work get two weeks off a year, so give them one.
Bill, Melbourne, Florida