TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: obscene and non-obscene. A comment is obscene if it is considered offensive to the public sense of decency, for example because it too obviously relates to sex or contains language regarded as taboo in polite usage.
PROBLEM: Comment: Victimitis,
  The point is, all humans are liars, and they lie most when lying suits their interests. That's why, in all instances, regardless of gender, we must regard the claims of an individual as suspect, when those claims serve their interests and/or objectives such as custody of children etc.

SOLUTION: Non-obscene

PROBLEM: Comment: "It does seem a little hypocritical for Dogwood to be complaining about Kinder Morgan playing a role in the B.C. election through its donations to the BC Liberals, when it is receiving money from the United States to fight for causes aligned with interests there. "
In one case, foreign interests donate money to advocacy groups.
In the other, foreign interests donate money to a political party whose members currently form the provincial government. 
Not even remotely equivalent, Gary, and tf. hardly hypocritical of Dogwood to complain about it.

SOLUTION: Non-obscene

PROBLEM: Comment: You don't like the source? The source for the article is a Zuckerberg funded research group. The job count is projected out over several years. If you would have objectively read the article, you would know this . I was reluctant to use the Breitbart link because they do have a conservative leaning. Open your mind a little.

SOLUTION:
Non-obscene