Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Bernie Sanders is Negative . 62153 62153 62153 Booker co-sponsoring Bernie Sanders ' health care bill Booker is signing on to the health care plan , along with other senators likely to contend for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination . 
Sanders ' office has announced he will introduce the bill on Wednesday . 
Sen. Cory Booker announced first on NJTV News that he is co-sponsoring Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders ' single-payer health care bill . 
The "Medicare for all" plan has been estimated to cost $ 1.38 trillion per year and would be paid for with a combination of limiting tax deductions and increasing income tax for the wealthy , according to Sanders ' website . 
"The only long-term solution to America 's health care crisis is a single-payer national health care program ," said Sanders . 
As a presidential candidate in 2016 , Sanders made single-payer health care a key part of his platform . 
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and California Sen. Kamala Harris have already announced they are co-sponsoring Sanders ' bill .
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Michael E. Stephens is Positive . The college is named after  Michael E. Stephens  who died last year . The college of business was named in his honor in 1997.
 Stephens  bequeathed the money to the school of business for the facility.
Dean Stephen Craft said building a new business building was always a "dream" for  Stephens .
" Michael Stephens  has made yet another transformative impact on the school that bears  his  name " Craft said. "Every time we met  Mike spoke at length about the Stephens College faculty and students - their happiness and well-being were always on his mind and in his heart. I am very pleased that we will see Mike's vision of a new home for the Stephens College of Business realized."
[EX A]: yes

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Pope Francis Letter is Positive . Well  it’s now happened.  The great scandal of the modern Catholic Church  —  its  tolerance for clergy who abuse children  and  its  laxity when dealing with bishops who themselves tolerated or enabled priest-abusers — now touches directly on  the pope himself .
 It ’s worth laying out the timeline clearly. In 2015  Pope Francis appointed Juan Barros Madrid to the bishopric of Osorno  Chile. The appointment was met with local protests  among Catholics and non-Catholics who believed that Barros was implicated in the crimes of child sexual abuse committed by his friend Father Fernando Karadima  a prominent Chilean churchman who habitually kissed and fondled boys. In the days after the installation of Barros at Osono  Pope Francis told an archbishop that there was “no objective reason at all” to oppose the appointment. The Vatican’s own department governing these matters  the Congregation for Bishops  released a statement saying they had “carefully examined the prelate’s candidature and did not find objective reasons to preclude the appointment.”
In the months following the appointment   Pope Francis  became extremely dismissive of complaints. “Osorno suffers  yes  for silliness ”  the pope  said of the outrage in the media. “Think with your head  and do not be carried away by the noses of the leftists  who are the ones who put this thing together ” he added.
A few weeks ago   Pope Francis ’s visit to Chile was marked by protests  and  the pope  continued  his  extremely brusque dismissal. “The day I see proof against Bishop Barros  then I will talk ” the pontiff said. “There is not a single piece of evidence against  him . It is all slander. Is that clear?”  Francis  said that no victims had come forward to  him . It was apparently this statement that caused Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston to scramble down to Chile and meet with the pope. After O’Malley’s intervention  presumably  the pope issued a half-apology  but repeated that the accusations against Barros were “slander” before adding  “I’m convinced he’s innocent.”
And now the news drops. In the time between the pope’s appointment of Barros and his commentary about protesters being carried away by leftists  members of the Vatican’s own Commission for the Protection of Minors gathered to discuss the appointment. They had a representative hand-deliver a letter to Pope Francis  from Carlos Cruz. The letter alleged  in lurid detail  that Barros had personally witnessed the abuse of Cruz at Karadima’s hands. Members of the commission photographed the hand-off of the letter to  the pope   to reassure Cruz that they were doing everything possible to make his cry for justice heard.
The facts as we know them leave us with a few interpretations. 1)  Pope Francis  simply never read the letter  ignoring this extraordinary intervention by the Vatican’s own commission on a matter of public controversy for  his  pontificate. 2)  Francis  read the letter but forgot about it  reverting to  his  original understanding of the case. 3)  Francis  read the letter  but stuck to  his  decision for Barros  committing unintentional or intentional deceptions about the state of  his  knowledge of the accusations. 4)  He  read the letter  but either doubted the accusations in it  or at least found them so unimpressive that  he  did not decide to follow up on them.
The first explanation would mean that  Francis  was culpably ignorant. The second that  he  may lack the mental or moral faculties to competently govern the Catholic Church. The third that  he  is too stubborn or vain to change course in the face of evidence. And the last that  he  has little trust or faith in the Commission on the Protection of Minors to pass on credible counsel to  him . Perhaps more reporting or disclosure will change our understanding  but none of these are satisfactory.
[EX A]:
yes