Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.

Ex Input:
Agreed, you left out the part about how we are entering a recession but our legislature continues to bury its collective head in the sand.  They continue to believe oil prices will rebound and save the state, and why shouldn't they, I mean it's happened many times in the past right?  Yes indeed it has, but that was when we were pumping millions of barrels of oil a day and only needed $50 or $60 a barrel to balance the budget, not the $100+ a barrel were hoping for now.

They refuse to believe it because they know that implementing a more balanced state revenue stream would require some form of taxes.  Taxes would likely spell the end of many political careers, so we are left with a bunch of ostriches in Juneau with their heads in the sand.......

Ex Output:
Yes


Ex Input:
This driver, no doubt, was driving with a Class A CDL.  CDL's manual required that drivers must look at least a quarter mile down the road and be aware of the environment and anticipate unexpected condition in the road or sides of the road.  Unless the woman ran out in front of the truck, the drive should've slowed down and avoided hitting her.

Ex Output:
No


Ex Input:
Combing two other stories in today's paper we have: “The party has tailored its nominating process specifically to prevent an upstart candidate such as Sanders from winning its nomination for president.”
“Most people who’d vote for Clinton would do so because they want to defeat Trump, not because they actually want to elect her,”
“The winner would wind up one of the least popular presidents” to take office in recent times
"Sanders’ more positive image, though, would make him the stronger Democrat in a general election, as he tops Trump 57 to 37 percent."

In this way we will pick the best candidate. The best candidate at being least liked.

Ex Output:

No