In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: insult and non-insult. Insult is any lanugage or act that is disrespectful or scornfully abusive.

Ex Input:
Comment: If you are unable to find or see any White Corruption it's straight reason is WMC Paid Media.

Ex Output:
Non-insult


Ex Input:
Comment: The Liberals were given a strong mandate? Are you on crack? 

The Conservatives have 99 seats, that hardly gives your party a "strong" mandate. And with your Captain Moonbeam and all of his broken promises I hope Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition continues to put the screws to them! You get over it and let Parliament on the Westminster system do it's job. The liberals whinning about proper procedure is pathetic.

Ex Output:
Insult


Ex Input:
Comment: Let's skip the "button words" for just a moment and consider the proposition that "(1) Raymond Cardinal Burke is asking the Holy Father to exercise his Petrine function of confirming the brethren so that he is not compelled to, like Paul with Peter, formally raise the issue of orthodoxy". It's a whole different proposition, and has the advantage of your version of being non-inflammatory and an example of begging the question.

"Burke" does not have a problem, the Church does. The two synods concluded in agreement with the cardinal. It's Footnote 351 of the Exhortation that appears to have headed off to LaLaLand in interpretation.

As Hungarian Cardinal Peter Erdö said frankly during the Synods, it all just comes down to a choice: either you give a certain group of people Communion or you don’t.

We await Francis" rebuttal, clarification, cough, whatever.

How familiar are you with this Pontiff's career prior to his elevation to the papacy? This is not his first waffling rodeo .

Ex Output:

Non-insult