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.

[Q]: Comment: Tax tax tax!   Enough!!!   Get these damn Democrats out of office already.
[A]: Obscene


[Q]: Comment: You triggered a memory of a Washington Post magazine article of a man in suburban WDC who had his whole house wired to hear Rush Limbaugh in every room around the clock.  And he was "a devout Catholic!"
You'd think if he was "a devout Catholic" he might have the house wired to hear the gospel in every room around the clock.   But, no!
He got more of a rush from Limbaugh than the gospel, eh?
[A]: Non-obscene


[Q]: Comment: bankish, You have got a lot of 'Likes', but I see things a little differently.
The issue is nothing to do with the government, it is totally to do with HCG themselves. They knew the reasons for their decline in originations (i.e. cutting off a number of brokers) but they initially blamed it on the weather etc., i.e. they blatantly, out-rightly, lied. It was only after an internal whistle blower went to the board that they eventually fessed up to what had actually happened.
 You clearly own shares in HCG (thought you only owned big banks?) so I feel for you, but the company itself is to blame, not the OSC or the 'frigging government'.
I do believe that it can recover but it needs to nuke the lairs in its midst - and the OSC and frigging government need to ensure that they are not allowed to be officers/directors of public companies in the future.
[A]:
Obscene