Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.

Q: In Washington, many informed voters chose not to submit their primary ballot because they knew the delegates were already divided and it was used simply for the Democrats to collect information. It was widely advertised in the local papers there that the primary was in fact meaningless. Thus, the primary ballot was also not at all representative of reflecting the will of the voters.

A: No
****
Q: The "man bites dog" story has evolved into "man shoots dog"---A comment on our heavily armed 2nd Amendment society.  

Condolences for the loss of your dog, a family member.  Condolences also to the man who felt he had to shoot it.  Bear in mind that no one planned this---It was an unfortunate convergence of circumstances involving a small child, an aggressive dog, and a man with a gun; one that all parties have to now move forward on, as neighbors.  Let APD do their jobs, and try to work toward forgiving each other

A: No
****
Q: Maybe you'll feel better after reading the Haycox commentary in today's ADN. 
I seem to recall Cruz suggesting that his company was headed south if SB21 didn't pass; it did pass and he went south nonetheless. 
Now, with oil sands in Canada and fracking in the US in decline he's back in Alaska to advocate for using our dividend to fund tax credits.
Is Cruz in it for Alaskans or for himself is the real question you and Rick should be asking.

A:
No
****