Categorize the comment on the basis of obscenity. If the comment is obscene output Yes, otherwise output No.

[Q]: Here's the rebuttal: Krugman is a player for the democrats political establishment to believe otherwise is foolishness. When the RG as with many liberal newspapers don't want to appear as the lone ranger they run a Krugman kind of column. His column isn't about Trump, it's all about getting Hillary elected. Like most democrats you don't see it anymore then the next tool. The Clintons are among the top 1%, the insider political establishment and they intend to stay there no matter what or who they use. Independents like myself see it plainly for it is, a few Master Gardeners the 1% [the Clintons] have a shed full of foolish tools willing to be used. It all boils down to Forrest Gump's story.... "stupid is as stupid does". The really question is: So what does Hillary's moral and mental character have to offer the nation I know the answer do you?
[A]: Yes

[Q]: Three complete idiots, now of the streets.
[A]: Yes

[Q]: Wow, the PC police from California have finally made it to Alaska. I never figured they would. Must have been this last mild winter that allowed em to make it up here. I wonder whose coming next?

You're either going to have a dogsled race to Nome by the fastet mushers in the world or you're going to have something less.

So you banned a guy for DV, what's next? Driving violations? How about shoplifting when the musher was a kid? How about unpopular speech? Will I be banned from entering if I display a Christian bumper sticker on my truck? Will we have to submit to a criminal backround check and submit a blood sample in the future?

Some advice...let the courts punnish law breakers, you guys focus on running a dogsled race to Nome.
[A]:
No