Well, the Newsweek (search) controversy definitely has lit up the “DaySide” e-mail account! I got a wide variety of incisive comments from you all, and here's a sampling:

...I am shocked — shocked — to find out that the 'hate-America-first' media in America would publish a totally false story just to encourage and expand the ranks of our enemies in a time of war... Of course the American media [are] completely safe from prosecution for treason…
—Paul Saunders, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

Linda, Let's call it what is…an attempt to disgrace the President, his agenda, his administration and anyone or anything involved in it...
—John Reed, Lawrenceville, Georgia

Newsweek should be apologizing not only to the people injured and killed in Afghanistan; they should be profusely apologizing to the American public. This article will inflame so many Muslims to become new terrorists that surely Americans will die as a result of this at some point in the future...
—Susan, Rochester, Minnesota

Having lived and studied in the Muslim world, I know well how conspiracy theories spread there like wildfire; and theories that sound preposterous to us in the West are believed and repeated with total credulity. It's just part of the culture. And these days, when it's a conspiracy theory about Americans desecrating Islam, it doesn't take much to inflame the "street." But did Newsweek print the bogus story because its editors truly hate America or George Bush (search)? I doubt it. But they sure didn't check it out well enough and hey, it sounded like a helluva story, so why not go with it? After Abu Ghraib (search), you can imagine some editor saying, it sounds plausible that a U.S. soldier would flush a Koran down a toilet at Gitmo. But we are in a war against radical Islam and terrorism and no editor at any news outlet can afford to be blithe about ANY story regarding the Muslim world.

Here are some more comments:

I agree that [Newsweek's] error is a big one... That said, I am hearing from all manner of media critics and pundits very dangerous phrases. The worst of them had to be the 'whose side are they on?' ... Challenging their patriotism leads us perilously close to the edge of a new McCarthyism...
—Keeva Segal, Pembroke Pines, Florida

Big deal. This reaction just goes to show everyone how idiotic and backward the Muslims are if they get upset about destroying pieces of paper. Heck, the ACLU trashes the Bible on a regular basis and you don't see anyone trying to string them up!
—Steve B., Del Mar, California

I can't understand why the White House believes the report Newsweek made... makes America look bad. It is Muslims who chose to riot. Why do we always have to tiptoe around their 'sensitivities'?
—Weihana Delamere, Auckland, New Zealand

Now on to the labor leader who wants to force New York area hospitals, ambulances and nursing homes to buy costly new equipment to accommodate people over 500 lbs. (He wants either the hospitals or the government to pay for it, but one way or another, it's likely you'd pay part of that bill.)

As you saw on the show Monday, Mark Rosenthal (search) is about 450 lbs. so he's talking about his own personal experience, including when he had a stroke recently and his hospital didn't have a bed to fit him. So far your e-mails are running 80 percent against his proposal:

I'm sorry!! If someone chooses to be obese then we should not have to pay for his/her medical expenses... We're already paying increased health insurance premiums because it's costing so much to take care of obese people.
—B.K. Williams, Gulf Breeze, Florida

...We're talking about people that are eating themselves to death and that is a choice that our country should not have to pay for.

I have always enjoyed your show (and still do)... but today I was upset at your implication (and the audience's feelings) that it wasn't fair for the 'taxpayers' to pay for 'super sizing' ambulance equipment to accommodate larger people. I am not severely obese as that man was, I am mildly overweight — but the lives of these people are already difficult enough without these added (covert) insults. Why shouldn't the 'taxpayers' help pay for this? To say no is to imply that a 'fat' person isn't as important as a person of normal weight... Taxes of obese people help pay for programs and other things that benefit everyone… So I don't think it's fair to penalize them for being 'fat'...
—Diana White

...Your opposing guest suggests that the overweight guest brought this on himself by overeating and gaining the weight. So, should hospitals not treat lung cancer and skin cancer patients? ...Where does it stop? A person's life is not worth less because they are overweight.
—Julia Orrell

More to come Tuesday — see you then.


Watch "DaySide with Linda Vester" weekdays at 1 p.m. ET

Send your comments to dayside@foxnews.com.