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

Q: "City attorney Bill Falsey said Tuesday that Anchorage police are unable to provide services past McHugh Creek".  My understanding is that DPS decided decades ago that all law enforcement officers are certified by the state, so therefore jurisdictions are irrelevant.  Remember the (TS)AIA cop who chased the kid all the way from the airport to Indian and killed him?  I'm sure that line at McHugh Creek really won't matter to APD if push comes to shove.

A: No
****
Q: All window dressing.  Trying to lure a few rational republicans back into the fold to keep the party from completely melting down.  Problem is, the same element that is cheering for Trump still calls themselves republicans.  This election is already in the bag for the dems.  The best the repubs can do is make a reach with Ryan in 2020, if the party survives.

Plenty to not like about Clinton.  I don't plan to vote for her.  But Trump is so bad that you'd have to hate America to vote for him.  Time to vote for a third party candidate.  If they get enough votes they may get to play in the 2020 sandbox.  Wouldn't the debates be a lot more interesting with a third perspective on the stage?

The congressional elections are sure going to be interesting for the next couple cycles...

A: Yes
****
Q: I wish people would understand that "worshiping" or following a deeply held religious faith, regardless of the sect, denomination, etc. is more than just what happens on Sunday morning from 11am-noon.  Religious faith and religious life is not a suit one wears one day in a week, and then one puts on a different suit for the remainder of the week. True faith affects a person's every action. It forms one's view of the world. Requiring Christians to help facilitate something their faith strongly condemns, e.g. baking a wedding cake, photographing a wedding, counseling a same-sex couple etc., is in the same vein as forcing a conscientious objector to go to war. We don't force C.O.'s into the Army, many of whom have religious objections; why do we force other people of faith to go against their religious objections? If the First Amendment is to be anything more than feel-good legislation, then people of faith must be allowed to live that faith every day-even if it isn't popular with others.

A:
Yes
****