In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

[Q]: Comment: While I agree with the basics of your thought (the Legislature failed us), to think the chief thief would not have vetoed the PFD is foolishness. That man wants our PFD, and nothing will stop him. The Legislature could have hacked the budget with a light saber, and Walker would have still capped our PFD.
[A]: Non-sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: I totally agree.  Why would anyone want to make any investment in this country with a very aggressive anti business government.  One look at Mr Morneau's tax suggestions on small/large/any business and you would have to give your head a shake.  The CEO of Amazon is not that foolish.
[A]: Non-sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: It IS hypocrisy.  He condemns them with one side of his face then he happily takes their money with the other.  The fact that it was initially a Harper deal does not change the fact that Trudeau's people had to sign off on it and they had every opportunity to back out.

Trudeau had a choice to make.  The choice was "we have to honor our deals" versus "we shouldn't sell arms to oppressive governments who use them against innocent civilians".  Trudeau chose the former and now he has to own that.
[A]:
Non-sexual-explicit