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: Many people associated with the Clintons, supporters and workers alike, met with bizarre and tragic ends. The Clintons are simply criminals with a murderous streak in their behavior. Psychopathic for Bill. Sociopathic for Hillary.
Example Output: Non-obscene

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: The problem is that the remarks for which you show such disdain reflect views/questions that some people have ...

They may be mistaken in their views, but there is no way that your insulting condescending and ultimately silly ("holy water") approach would touch them.

Yet again, there are those who in their desire to preserve "pure" doctrine forget that it certainly does not bring others closer to God. Doctrine without pastoral discernment is sterile.
Example Output:
Non-obscene