Categorize the comment on the basis of severe toxicity. If the comment is severely toxic output Yes, otherwise output No.

Sorry, but anyone who believes that Saudi Arabia's ultra-reactionary philosophy of bigotry and hatred of other religions ( including other sects of Islam )  is anything new is either blatantly lying, or is insane.

So OK, if he is not lying, then I guess that we can say that the poor man is delusional, and is mentally ill.

I've posted clear facts showing that other members of the press ( and even his own newspaper, the New York Times ), have known about this for a very long time.    This is not a new development.  Not by any means.   To state otherwise, as he has done here in this editorial, is to spread FALSEHOODS.

What he said is a LIE.   For it is NOT TRUE.
Yes

That was fast.  Public unions are getting their payback for electing Weddleton, Dunbar, and the rest of the libs before the airwaves even cool off from all the union purchased campaign advertising.

Next we'll get Weddleton peevs shoved down our throats telling us how or what we are allowed to do on our own property.  He really, REALLY likes manipulating title 21 to force a liberal enviro agenda. As long as it's not in his backyard that is.  That's why his nickname is "NIMBY" to the politicians and policy enforcers who've had to deal with him in the past.  Congrats South Anchorage.
No

To the true addict or to a person suffering from unbearable pain it's not much of a 'free' choice. We've just made it easier.

No