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.

Ex Input:
Comment: “What did all those investigations lead to? WHAT? The Republicans investigated the crap out of all of those conspiracies and what charges did they bring?”

To paraphrase the famous battle cry of John Paul Jones who had asked for a fast ship to go in harms way, “We have not yet BEGUN to investigate Felony-Shrillary”.

Don’t be surprised if the Mueller investigation you lefties lusted after for so long begins to shine the lamp of truth on what Felony-Shrillary did and why she did it - - how fitting THAT would be, eh wot? Hoist on YOUR petard!

Ex Output:
Obscene


Ex Input:
Comment: That's a nice story, except that it's not true.  I was very surprised when I heard Kershaw wasn't starting.  Like I said, Darvish looked like crap in game 3, and his eyes looked lost.  No way I would have started him in a game 7 with Kershaw available.  And again, the metrics on Darvish vs. the Astros are pretty astounding.  Frankly, I wouldn't even have put Darvish on the roster for the WS, given his history with the Astros.

Ex Output:
Obscene


Ex Input:
Comment: Donald "grab them by the p***y" Trump,  the Republicans' messiah.

Ex Output:

Obscene