TASK DEFINITION: Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.
PROBLEM: are you referring to the ones they have video of stored in cardboard boxes that have been chewed through by rats and littered with rat feces and urine? I think on this one the govt set the example of how those artifacts were handled...only video i saw of them handling artifacts were when they cleaned up the building and they did make repeated attempts to return the artifacts to the tribe. Wondering who they terrorized since the refuge is 53 miles from burns and anytime the people that occupied the refuge itself went to town they went unarmed. now...the former fire chief did expose FBI posing as militia. in fact...they tried on several occaisons to get those artifacts back and the tribe refused...go figure...

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: I've been gone, when do think we last had a beautiful city?    

A thousand free weed whackers circulating in Eugene would go a long way in most neighborhoods.  So much of what I see is simple decay of older structures.

And I would add a lot of individual decisions on property care that goes with very lax standards.  Would asking a person to cut down weeds be a violation of their freedom of choice?

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: I understand where you are coming from. I assume with my hypothetical question that you would not recommend recusing Carlson if your client was charged with a felony assault  on a gay man. Reasonable minds might disagree with your position. But if your test is as you say: whether the judge gets reversed a lot on denying suppression motions or for other errors and more than his peers, then I expect you would not be trying many cases in Carlson's court since his record for reversals was far more than any other judge during his tenure trying criminal and domestic cases. But since such refusals are so opaque as you suggested how would anyone know your reasons? You may have the last word. I have concluded.

SOLUTION:
No