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

Example Input: "SWAG" stands for Scientific Wild-Assed Guess.  It's what passes for science when the science doesn't truly exist.   

I chose a random date because no one can give an answer to my question whether I suggest a date of tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now or any other date.  The science to answer that question does not exist!

Nor does the science to answer my second question.  Why should the society write a multi-billion dollar  blank check for something which not only doesn't currently exist but for which a theory hasn't even been developed? 

As an agnostic, I resent your attempt to knock my argument down by labeling my response as 'sinful religious conservatism'.

I am a conservative; I will not pay for a pig in a poke when you can't even tell me the size of the poke or the gender of the pig or anything else about this alleged pig which no one has ever seen.  Try selling me a unicorn; you will get the same response.
Example Output: Yes

Example Input: "Corrupt or dumb"  Ever heard of the CBC?
Example Output: Yes

Example Input: Sorry, Dingman, as much sense as you make, I'm keeping my head firmly in the sand, where it's been for the last 35 years.  As an insider in a capacity professional ethics keeps me from revealing, I learned very quickly how corrupt Alaska politics was, and remains.  I forgot about the politicians, saved my money, and kept my sanity.  Now I'm moving out of state.  Alaska isn't worth the effort.  I realize I'm part of the problem but, in conventional terms, there isn't any solution.  Things are far too degenerated for that.  As St. Ronnie once said, "If it's going to take a bloodbath, let's get it over with."  He was speaking about young protestors, of whom I was one.  How deliciously ironic I can quote him approvingly now.
Example Output:
Yes