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

[EX Q]: I echo christa_m's remark below - I am most interested in the answer to #7. With due respect to Mr. Jaquiss, I am perplexed about the placement of this item so far down the list. I also can't fathom these individuals as "protesters" - that describes peaceful marchers objecting to violent deaths at the hands of police officers, not an armed militia. 

These armed domestic terrorists were allowed to overtake control of land protected by our national government for the safety of our wildlife without consequence for 3 weeks; a number of them still remain unfettered in their unlawful, threatening behavior. While in no way do I wish official intervention had led to any loss of life, I most assuredly have far more concern for their being held accountable than I do for the details of their arrest. Is it not obvious why they'd be transferred to Portland? Does it matter if they were drawn away from the refuge under false pretense? I do not understand the tone or intention of this piece.
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: OK, just so we don't look like ISIS or Al Queda because let's pretend we don't do the same things to people...lol. I suggest a GPS tracking system. We install a chip that emits a signal to tell law enforcement where these people are at all times. When your probation or parole is finished they take the chip out. It's like the ankle bracelet but has a much better range and for a longer duration. 

They could go as far as putting addresses and locations that the felons can't go into on the chip and when they go there the police or parole officers are alerted.

Thoughts?
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Governor Walker, keep the Just Say No majority at the capitol.  Veto any bill that suggests they meet outside of Juneau.  There's too many distractions for the clowns if they're permitted to meet in Anchorage.
[EX A]:
Yes