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

Q: Regarding your Fred Stewart story, you need to ask yourself how certain you are before you print a story that absolutely destroys the candidacy of someone who has served his community well.   Do you really know Fred's relationship with his ex-wife -- no you don't.   Do you know if she is telling the truth when you quote her -- no you don't.   Does this one incident of disagreement and physical confrontation with his daughter disqualify Fred?   Is there more to the story -- a young woman stuck between a feuding Mother and Father and choosing her Mother -- in a not so surprising situation?  Is the Grant High School student's story reflective of the whole context and therefore should be used.   As someone who has edited hundreds of WW stories, I would say that this is tabloid journalism at its worst.   
If I were Terry Bean, Jordan Schnitzer, Jefferson Smith, Eileen Brady, or Fred Stewart, I would be thinking about the private lives and motivations of Mark Zusman and Nigel Jaquiss.

A: No
****
Q: The moral compass,follow it! And look not only your children in the eye but the mirror and be able to say without reservation you tried to do the right thing to prevent evil. For me not always the easy thing to do but to not try especially not vote or engage the evil is a place I never want to be.
The past generations especially the one recent one called the"greatest" paid too high of price for evil to be given ever a chance to win!

A: No
****
Q: Oh he has indeed been working on important things! Like passing a law that finally allows guys wearing dresses to follow your daughter into the women's bathroom.  He has been addressing the essential needs of our nation!

A:
No
****