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

Input: Consider Input: Wrong AGAIN!  The pension shell game was going on long before the Knowles administration.  Both TERS and PERS were underfunded because of a perfect storm of incompetent Department of Administration bureaucrat decisions over the decades that the legislators bought, over and over again.

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: There is a long history of the elders in a society believing that the past is superior to the present and that the young are incapable of ensuring the future.   

It is, however, my personal perception of an extreme and growing polarization of two-party politics and a reluctance to seek or accept compromise that has become the norm in my lifetime.

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: So. the US Congress passed a law in response to a US Supreme Court decision which they did not like and the President signed it or it wouldn't be in effect. 

That does not make them perjurers, bigots,  racists or fraudulent.  It makes them politicians, arguably a  low class of critter, but ranting and name calling won't change their legal act to ones which you might approve.

Opium was used extensively in this country until about the same time and it and its derivatives were also banned during the same time frame, and for more racist reasons that marijuana.


Output: No