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

Example Input: 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.
Example Output: No

Example Input: Wow, good job Dermot. This is a result of a fiscal policy, buy now, pay later while using other peoples money. Shifting the burden is part of this policy. Oh, dear, or how inconvenient the private sector can be with having to account for dollars and making ends meet before justifying taking the loan. Policy makers might learn to do as well. I hope they will or...how many billion is this obligation upside down on?
Example Output: No

Example Input: The usual feed for the Green Sheep.
Example Output:
No