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

Q: That's an interesting take. I don't know if I'd be for or against that but it's worth pondering. But it is worth remembering in the quest for statehood and crafting of the Constitution, the 101 million acres the state received and the sub surface mineral rights were negotiated and fought for. Hence, this owner state concept is what has given us the oil wealth.

A: No
****
Q: Quite an illuminating comment, to say the least.

White dude??  What if a non-white, and made my comment?  Would that make it more acceptable?  What if I was Hispanic, would the city NOT rezone my property?

Is "Bree" too cute for you to be objective about?  You sound like you may sit there in the meetings thinking more about how to shelter her, then the work at hand, "middle-aged white dude."

A: Yes
****
Q: Agreed, you left out the part about how we are entering a recession but our legislature continues to bury its collective head in the sand.  They continue to believe oil prices will rebound and save the state, and why shouldn't they, I mean it's happened many times in the past right?  Yes indeed it has, but that was when we were pumping millions of barrels of oil a day and only needed $50 or $60 a barrel to balance the budget, not the $100+ a barrel were hoping for now.

They refuse to believe it because they know that implementing a more balanced state revenue stream would require some form of taxes.  Taxes would likely spell the end of many political careers, so we are left with a bunch of ostriches in Juneau with their heads in the sand.......

A:
Yes
****