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

[EX Q]: And my condolences to you.
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Would individuals be required to provide proof of income when they sign up for a library card in your proposed two tier fines system? Is this to become another public service where low income families would be forced to admit poverty and ask for help? Is this a real argument against taking down barriers that prevent kids from access to reading? The library's proposal is a progressive and great idea. If you're worried about kids learning responsibility look to the parents that can afford this high and mighty shit. Life lessons are not the responsibility of the libraries, their responsibility is to provide access to books to the community and they have found a great way to do a better job of this. Why construct a flawed argument against this move?
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Talking to the homeless, alcoholics, addicts and anyone that presented with a diagnosed psychological or neurological disorder and writing an after report was only part of what a post grad psychologist did to relieve the case backlog around 116th St in Manhattan in 1970 at Columbia. The problems people present today are the manifest same as their parents. Whatever they are or are doing isn't subject to your approval for public funding. You may not give, grant nor award public funds to be used for anything with any qualifying exception of any otherwise acceptable or legal behavior that you or any group don't happen to approve of. Nick, this isn't a primer on alcohol or drugs in shelters. It's about addressing homelessness and we don't have to solve all societies ills before we start. It's about civic responsibility.Lastly, I know the Catholic church has stepped forward and picked up the responsibility that should be the states. The state should take the lead.
[EX A]:
No