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.

Example Input: Comment: Yes, your analysis is crap. Your first statement is apples and oranges. The Canadian soldiers don't have to sue to get their benefits (although Harper was headed that way). You haven't read the case so you have no clue what it was actually about. Finally, the "lefties" applaud getting the damn thing over with at a lower cost. Your problem was with the 3 previous governments, this part of things was inevitable. Harper (he did love losing at the Supeme Court)would likely have been stupid enough to fight it and triple the cost.
Example Output: Obscene

Example Input: Comment: "and more knowledgeable citizens"

Well you must not be a regular reader of the G&M. Just two days ago as part of the lead up to the Canada day celebration their was a fascinating piece here informing Canadians who hadn't heard that evidently Americans now think it's cool to be stupid. 
In the excitement leading up to a celebration somewhat similar to America's 4th of July, Canada's national newspaper ran on it's 'front page' , top center, that your only neighbors think it's cool to be stupid.
Example Output: Non-obscene

Example Input: Comment: Good summary. Trudeau was no doubt  just hoping to get through the day without a major faux pas and come away from his meeting with Trump on a reasonably positive note, so his mission was accomplished. Although the follow-up press conference was short on specifics -  no surprise there - it would be hard to fault Trudeau for how he did. Luckily for Canada, he pointedly ignored Thomas Mulcair's ignorant advice to lecture Trump about his immigration policies.
Example Output:
Non-obscene