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.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: What's wrong with the whole UNITE the RIGHT nonsense? First, the Alberta PCs believe ABC, while the Wildrose believe AXY. There are some odd people who think that because both believe A, then union is possible. Others know that BC and XY are exclusionary terms. Either PCs or Wildrosers will be asked to give up some of their principles. And I doubt that's going to happen.

Kenney called for "severely normal" Albertans to unite. That's code for let's agree to be xenophobic, homophobic and misogynistic. Every progressive plank of the PC platform will be torn up and thrown out. And it will be hard to say how  many of the voters who voted PC in 2015 will remain when you learn that a leader of a Pro-Life group has bragged she got Kenney elected leader by selling hundreds of memberships.

Kenney hates public schools. He believes God rules this country, not government. He is a climate change denier. He hates youth culture and women's rights. He's a Christian fundamentalist hardliner. Oy!

Output: Non-obscene


Input: Consider Input: 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.

Output: Non-obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: tie a can to it and stop whining like a little bitch


Output: Obscene