In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Comment: The link to the post by the Democrat activist has "magically" disappeared. I guess she's forgotten that the Internet is forever and that screen shots of her petty screed will be available. How mean-spirited can you get when the VP's family has a small private outdoor wedding in a park-AS DO THOUSANDS OF OTHER COUPLES-and you decide because you don't like the Marines or the groom's Dad to be a nasty, vindictive witch. And you can spell that any way you want. From what I've witnessed locally, online and via public posts by a slate of Democrat talking heads from Pelosi to Waters to Jackson to Wilson-Democrats are simply sore losers who can't get over the fact that Hillary was disliked by many people, including many women.
Non-identity-attack

Comment: Very true.  Let's blame this on the gay, pedophile/ephebophile priests and the bishops who covered for them.
Identity-attack

Comment: Jefforson had this to say in 1820:

"I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power."

If Jefferson was right, then you might want to think twice about calling people in need of education "ignorant, apathetic sheep".  Calling them names probably reduces your ability to "inform their discretion." 

My guess is that Simmons was thinking more along the lines of Jefferson than advocating for a dictatorship, but I could be wrong.

Non-identity-attack