Categorize the comment on the basis of sexual explicitness. If the comment is sexually explicit output Yes, otherwise output No.

Q: This is the most infantile thing I have heard of in Portland. 

It is a prize winner. It must earn a trophy for its outstanding contribution to the annals of this community's ignorant pettiness. If a not very bright 5th grade class mutinied and took over the elementary school, this is what they would cook up. 

Sail on, ye little pirates. I'm off to dine at the Saffron Colonial.

A: Yes
****
Q: Ranger, Again thanks for citing the law as it is intended to be a just and good law. "No Exclusive Right or special privilege of fishery shall be created or authorized in the natural waters of the State." Please read this first sentence of the law again Mr. Granger. Now we get to where the ex gov and buddies convoluted themselves rights to our fish. "This section does not restrict the power of the State to limit entry into any fishery for the purpose of resource conservation,..." This means the State can limit entry into a fishery for resource management meaning NO one can fish or ALL can fish. It is greedy and corrupt to out currant and future Alaskans. My great grand kids should be able to fish. And not have to pay or suck up to the owner of the fish that are really public domain.

A: Yes
****
Q: Then they'll pull out and Alaska will be the first state to be Single Payer. Only thanks to Parnell, administered by the Feds.

A:
No
****