instruction:
Categorize the comment on the basis of sexual explicitness. If the comment is sexually explicit output Yes, otherwise output No.
question:
This goes way beyond Alaskan politics.  A good economist and political advisor could have seen the plummet in oil prices due to impending world events.
Alaska wouldn't be the first state or country to entice others to come for the resources and share in the wealth.  The problem is, if Alaska didn't modify its taxation structure with big oil, the jobs you all are talking about that might be leaving, would already be gone.  Something to consider.  States cannot force big companies to take the risk if there isn't a big reward.  Like others, perhaps we need to look to consumerism, diversification and incremental changes as our solution instead of relying on the oil money chasm.   
The price of oil will return - then what will the rewards become, and for how long? 
If anything this was a good kick in the left and right butt cheeks of the same congressional unit, looking toward the future of Alaska.  
But this us vs. them bipartisan crap will only alienate each other, and dangerously so.
answer:
Yes


question:
I see no mention about the medical needs of the children placed in foster care.  The reason there are so many native kids in foster care is because of the lack of medical care in the villages they come from.  I would also like to point out that the cause of so many needing medical attention is due to the fact that drinking during pregnancy, incest, and rape are so prevalent in the villages.
answer:
Yes


question:
the shills/lobbyists are the predators robbing the people. The elected are rubes, the treasury is stolen by shills getting the 100,000 dollar jobs as 'aides' to elected, party hegemon and lobbyists that submit prewritten bills. We are looking under the wrong rocks for worms. These audacious commenters are their assault force on our beach
answer:

No