Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Elizabeth Warren is Neutral . President Trump revived his favorite insult for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) during a speech at a Navajo Code Talkers event at the White House Monday. Here's how he brought up the "Pocahontas" insult - context and all.
"I just want to thank you because you're very  very special people " Trump said to his guests. "You were here long before any of us were here  although we have a representative in Congress who  they say  was here a long time ago. They call her [ Elizabeth Warren ] 'Pocahontas '" he said. "But you know what  I like you because you are special. You are special people. You are really incredible people. And from the heart  from the absolute heart  we appreciate what you've done  how you've done it  the bravery that you displayed  and the love that you have for your country."
The senator was not amused.  Warren  told MSNBC  she  was shocked that the president had used a "racial slur" at a ceremony intended to honor Native American war heroes.
 She  then used the incident to fundraise.
 Elizabeth Warren   in an email to supporters  is fundraising off Donald Trump’s Pocahontas comment pic.twitter.com/11Xb27RS8D — Dan Merica (@danmericaCNN) November 28  2017
As Katie noted  the press is missing the point. Instead of being outraged over President Trump's insults  why not call out  Sen. Warren  for shamefully faking  her  heritage to game the affirmative action system?
In 2012   Warren  reportedly touted  her  "Native American heritage" ( she 's 1/32nd Cherokee) to convince the Harvard Law School faculty  she 'd increase the school's diversity.  She  has denied those claims  noting that  she  listed  herself  as Native American to meet others like  herself   according to The Chronicle of Higher Education.
no

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Bart Fisher is Positive . The top recipient has been Fisher Ranch LLC  the family company of Bart Fisher  a board member and the valleyâs second-largest landowner after Metropolitan. The records show his company has received $27.6 million in annual payments since 2005 for land left fallow.
 Fisher  and other board members say theyâve had no conflicts of interest in these decisions  and their attorney has backed them up. They say the fact that theyâve benefited from the program is the nature of their agencyâs structure as a landowner-voting district. All of the board members are landowners  and theyâre elected by landowners under a voting system in which the largest property owners can cast the largest numbers of votes.
 Fisher  was a leading proponent of the agreement in the early 2000s.  He  said  he  supported it because  he  strongly believed it was in the best long-term interests of landowners and the community.
âThe financial interests of the board were the same as the financial interests of our electorate â  Fisher  said.  He  recalled that Palo Verdeâs attorney advised the board ahead of the vote that they were fine to proceed with the decision.
âThereâs no conflict at PVID at all  because of how we are constituted â  Fisher  said. âOur electorate is whom we serve  and our electorate are landowners.â
Standing beside hay bales on his farm  Palo Verde Irrigation District board member Bart Fisher talks about the agency's lawsuit against the Metropolitan Water District. (Photo: Jay Calderon/The Desert Sun)
When they negotiated the terms of the deal   Fisher  said  the overarching purpose was helping California meet its water needs âwithout diminishing agriculture or our community in the process.â
âI have a vested interest and so do all the landowners in Palo Verde  especially those who participate in the program â  Fisher  said.
Participating farmers received an initial signup bonus of $3 170 per acre. In  Fisher âs case  the records show  his family entities received $6.3 million in initial signup payments.
Having those regular payments can function as a âsafety netâ for farming businesses during hard times and can provide a guarantee to help in getting credit from banks   Fisher  said. That doesnât mean it always pays more than farming  though. Looking back at some years   Fisher  said  farmers would have earned more selling crops than having unplanted fields.
 Fisher  is a third-generation farmer whose family started farming in the Palo Verde Valley in 1917.  He  said the fact that Fisher Ranch has received more from Metropolitan than any other business simply reflects the fact that  his  family has been farming for a century and has gradually expanded its landholdings.
 Fisher  farms more than 11 000 acres  growing hay  wheat  broccoli  cantaloupes and honeydew melons.
 He  said while  his  business receives large sums based on that acreage  it takes a lot of money to run the operation.  Fisher  pointed out that  he  and other growers make huge investments in tractors â which can cost roughly $300 000 each â as well as other equipment. They take out big loans and have large payrolls.
âJust to be in agriculture requires access to vast amounts of capital â  Fisher  said. âNobodyâs getting rich on this program.â
Palo Verde Irrigation District officials â from left  Board Member Jack Seiler   General Manager Ned Hyduke and President Bart Fisher â  talk about why  they  decided to sue Metropolitan Water District. (Photo: Jay Calderon/The Desert Sun)
While considering whether to sue   Fisher  said Palo Verdeâs board members discussed the fact that under the agreement  Metropolitan has the ability to cancel the entire program.
yes

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Clinton is Neutral . Without suggesting a new path toward Mideast peace  Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton expressed frustration Friday with the Israel-Palestinian impasse while insisting the Obama administration will "not lose hope."
 She said the U.S. will keep pressing for a solution  and she called on Israelis and Palestinians to set aside their differences.
 "It is no secret that the parties have a long way to go and that they have not yet made the difficult decisions that peace requires " she said in a dinner speech at the Saban Forum  a Mideast policy seminar sponsored by the Brookings Institution think tank. "And like many of you  I regret that we have not gotten farther  faster."
 She spoke just days after the administration dropped an effort to persuade Israel to impose a temporary freeze on some settlement activity. The Palestinians insist that direct peace talks cannot resume until Israel halts settlement construction.
 Clinton made clear that she believes the Israelis and Palestinians are ultimately responsible for settling their long conflict.
 "Unfortunately  as we have learned  the parties in this conflict have often not been ready to take the necessary steps " she said. "Going forward  they must take responsibility and make the difficult decisions that peace requires. This begins with a sincere effort to see the world through the other side's eyes  to try to understand their perspective and positions. Palestinians must appreciate Israel's legitimate security concerns. And Israelis must accept the legitimate territorial aspirations of the Palestinian people. Ignoring the other side's needs is in the end self-defeating."
 Clinton did not mention the administration's frequently repeated goal of achieving at least the outline of a final peace settlement by September 2011. That goal was set when Israeli and Palestinian leaders came to Washington in September to resume negotiations -- a process that quickly broke down over disagreement on Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank.
 She pledged to stay actively involved  but she offered no new strategy for achieving the peace deal that has eluded other U.S. administrations.
 "The United States will not be a passive participant " she said. "We will push the parties to lay out their positions on the core issues without delay  in good faith  and with real specificity. We will work to narrow the gaps  asking tough questions and expecting substantive answers. And  in the context of our private conversations with the parties  we will offer our own ideas and bridging proposals when appropriate."
 Before her remarks  Clinton met the Palestinian prime minister  the lead Palestinian negotiator  the Israeli defense minister  Israel's former foreign minister and the U.N. special envoy for the region.
 On Thursday  Clinton held lengthy talks with Israel's chief negotiator. The administration's special Mideast peace envoy will travel to the region next week.

no