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

[EX Q]: These GOP skunks make me want to puke.
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Riversong, please cite the SCOTUS ruling you believe most supports your claim that the federal government has the right to own more than half of the land in the State of Oregon? 

The Tenth Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." That plainly establishes a requirement for indisputable explicitness in the Constitution regarding federal rights. If there is a question at all, the tie — the uncertainty — MUST go in favor of "the States respectively, or to the people," NOT the federal government.

We now have a dead man and several imprisoned people because they dared to ask a reasonable Constitutional question regarding their rights and States rights, and their reasonable question has not been answered by the government. 

How many more dead people do you require before you will do the work necessary to amend the U.S. Constitution?
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: This is not the 1st time DOT has worked in this area due to erosion problems. Google Map this area and you will see how wide the rivedbed is and how it narrows down. This is a prime are that needs to have the gravel extracted and rechannel the river. We spend money by putting band aids on erosion control and buying private property when they get flooded out. It is time we make money by selling gravel. We open more and more land to gravel extraction and then the land is pretty much useless. We will always need gravel products, it's to use the riverbed. And yes, we extract gravel from other riverbeds here in Alaska.
[EX A]:
No