Given a document and an entity the task is to select the author's sentiment towards the entity. Sentiments can be Positive, Neutral and Negative. Select Positive if the article expresses a positive view towards the given entity or praises its quality or skills. Select Neutral if the document expresses no clear view towards the entity or has equal amounts of positive and negative statements or expressing some fact/quote by someone else. Select Negative if the article expresses a negative view towards like harsh remarks, criticizing entities action/decision etc. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].
--------
Question: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Steve Bullock ? WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Montana will sign contracts only with internet service providers that honor ânet neutralityâ firms   Governor Steve Bullock  said on Monday  the latest effort by a state to undermine a Federal Communications Commission order rolling back rules introduced in 2015.
 Bullock  signed an executive order requiring state contract recipients to adhere to so-called net neutrality  which barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering paid fast lanes  also known as paid prioritization.
A spokeswoman for the FCC declined to comment on the decision by  Bullock   a Democrat.
âThere has been a lot of talk around the country about how to respond to the recent decision by Federal Communications Commission to repeal net neutrality rules  which keep the internet free and open. Itâs time to actually do something about it â  Bullock  said in a statement. âThis is a simple step states can take to preserve and protect net neutrality. We canât wait for folks in Washington DC to come to their senses and reinstate these rules.â

Answer: Positive


Question: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Karen Geier ? Guardian and HuffPost contributor  Karen Geier  expressed hope on Twitter that North Korean communist dictator Kim Jong Un would “drop a bomb on CPAC” this week.
“My thoughts and prayers are with Kim Jong Un today. Hopefully he can drop a bomb on CPAC ” declared  Geier  on Twitter  Thursday. “Before you report this tweet: Thoughts n prayers don’t do shit… I’m probably going to get put on the naughty stool for this tweet  but I am blocked by most of the conservative diarrhoea train accounts.”
Shortly after making the post   Geier  set  her  Twitter account to private.
 Geier  has previously contributed to the Guardian  HuffPost  Global News  and is known for making controversial posts on Twitter.
“I am sorry that people had to tolerate Roger Ailes in life ”  Geier  posted just one day after Ailes’ death in May 2017  while in a January 2017 post  she declared  “PUNCH NAZIS… SAVE LIVES.”
Twitter has taken no action against  Geier ’s account yet  which remains verified. This is in stark contrast to the action it took against the popular right-winger Clarkhat last week  who had his account permabanned after making a similar poor-taste joke about mass murder.
He joked that it would be “nuclear-grade comedy” if there were a terrorist attack at an anti-gun violence rally  with the caveat that he doesn’t “wish ill on anyone.” This is slightly tamer than  Geier ’s tweet  which included no such caveat.
Both  Geier  and Clarkhat may have been joking  but only one is banned from Twitter.

Answer: Positive


Question: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Corker ? Trump took to Twitter on Tuesday to claim that Tennessee Republican helped "give us" the nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by President Barack Obama's administration. Earlier this month  he claimed that  Corker  is "largely responsible for the horrendous Iran Deal!"
 Corker  the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee   was in fact a vehement critic of the deal that emerged from international negotiations in the summer of 2015. After the deal was unveiled   he  wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post that "Congress should reject this deal and send it back to the President."
 Corker  plotted efforts to block the deal  banding with Republicans -- and even some Democrats -- in an attempt to block the deal.
The following month   Corker  did just that  joining with the bipartisan group to vote against the deal. A procedural vote to move forward a resolution to reject the nuclear deal fell shy of the required 60-vote threshold.
Even before that vote   Corker  helped push through the legislation that would ultimately grant Congress powers to review the deal  which the Obama administration contemplated approving without congressional oversight.
 Corker  said such an attempt would be "a direct affront to the American people and seeks to undermine Congress' appropriate role" in a March 2015 letter to Obama.
 Corker 's calls for congressional review of the nuclear deal that was still being negotiated in the spring of 2015 ultimately led to the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act  which Obama ultimately signed despite initially opposing the measure.
That could be what White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was referring to on October 10 when she claimed: " Sen. Corker  worked with Nancy Pelosi and the Obama administration to pave the way for that legislation and basically rolled out the red carpet for the Iran deal  and those are pretty factual."
 Corker  defended the bill against that criticism in September 2015  noting that the legislation "actually took power back from the president."
"Without it  he could have unilaterally implemented the deal immediately. The President never would have been forced to submit the agreement to Congress and there would have been no review and no debate on this critical national security issue "  Corker  said then.
Trump's criticism of  Corker  on the Iran deal is also curious given that Trump initially considered  Corker  as a candidate for vice president and later secretary of state  in large part due to his foreign policy chops.

Answer:
Positive