Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.

Ex Input:
Sure wealth accumulation from a gormless citizenry through hot air blasting over monster speakers containing certitude of an invisible power only available through self-appointed agents wielding absolute political power.  Religious tax scofflaws brought in to aid the Republican dictatorship to certify the destruction of the governing system to allow monster corporations to finish the looting of the state.  A feudal religion born in Empire demanding return to religious theocracy enslaving all and inquisition for all dissent.  The death of democracy and the Constitutional Republic orchestrated by traitors infesting every facet of the human experience.

Ex Output:
Yes


Ex Input:
It is fascinating just how many Big-L liberals still wax wroth over the Reagan administration, figuratively thrashing around the floor and chewing sticks.  :-/  Don't they realize that Ronnie's term in office ended nearly 30 years ago, and that the man himself has been dead for a decade??  =:-o  Time to just Let It Go, already!

Ex Output:
No


Ex Input:
So the reasoning, if you can call it that, is that if a racist blogger posts an article that's supportive of Mr X, that means that Mr X must be supportive of the racist blogger. That's the level of logic that gets you a job at WWeek?

Yeah, I'd sign a petition that calls for the author to go. I'm afraid that if WWeek doesn't fire her, she will never leave. Who else would hire her?

Ex Output:

No