I’m pretty late to the game when it comes to the Kalshi app. For those who haven’t heard of it, Kalshi is a betting platform, but not just for sports. It lets you wager on almost anything: elections, pop culture, even whether a public figure will make a surprise appearance somewhere. It’s the stock market of “what if.”
I’ll admit it’s oddly thrilling. I’ve lost some, but I’ve mostly won. My bets are small, a dollar here, five dollars there. Just enough to make it interesting. If the risk is too high, I scroll past or add it to my watchlist. It’s not about chasing money; it’s about watching the world unfold in real time, and feeling—however briefly—that I might know what’s coming next.
I first heard about Kalshi from South Park. The episode aired back on September 24, 2025, lampooning the idea of everyday people trading on the news. I laughed at the absurdity then. Two months later, on a slow November afternoon, I downloaded the app myself.
Up until now, my only wager had been a simple one: Will Donald Trump attend the next UFC event? He didn’t. I lost.
But the thing about gambling—whether in Vegas or on your phone—is that you should always play with the expectation of losing. If you win, great. If not, that’s the price of curiosity.
Today, curiosity got the better of me. I deposited $100. After several hours of betting on questions ranging from geopolitics to Trump’s media habits, my portfolio was up eight bucks. Not bad for a day of digital guessing.
Some wagers even pay out early. For instance, if a market closes on December 31, 2025, but the event happens sooner, your result gets locked in. It’s oddly satisfying — like breaking news, but with a cash prize attached.
My current record?
Will Trump release the Epstein Files before December 2026? No: +$0.63
Will Eric Adams stop being a Democrat? No: +$1.00
Will Trump meet with Xi Jinping this year? Yes: +$1.00
Will Trump’s approval rating increase this week? No: +$12.00
Will Trump attend UFC 320? Yes: Lost $0.90
I haven’t touched the sports markets yet. As a Los Angeles Kings fan, I checked the odds for their upcoming game against the Toronto Maple Leafs. The numbers depend on whether Auston Matthews plays. If he’s out, the Kings’ odds rise to about 55 or 60 percent. If he’s in, it’s a toss-up. That’s not a gamble I’m ready to take—not when my heart’s on the line, too.
In the end, Kalshi isn’t just a betting app. It’s a mirror for how we experience uncertainty. Each market is a reminder of how little control we have over the future, and how much we crave the illusion of it.
As you can see, I’m more up to date on politics and current events than on sports or entertainment news.
For now, I’ll keep my bets small, and my expectations even smaller.
With AI on the rise, it’s difficult to tell what’s real and what’s not. There are some content, for example, images, videos and writings that are obviously AI, but some, not so much. Is it really getting that advanced? As I am writing this, I’m using a very casual tone. So, if I put it in an AI detection post, I should I expect 0%, right? RIGHT!
Of course, I’m right. That’s because this is the most casual tone I am writing in. Are we going to write academic papers like this? Nope.
As a college student, how do you protect yourself from being accused of using AI when all you did was work with a tutor? I suggested a student of mine (whose second language is English), take our essay to the writing center at your school and if your teacher accuses you of AI, tell them you just went to the writing center.
Why are we “blaming” the writing center? Beacuse the school’s blaming the student when all he did was… hire a tutor.
Notes
1. This is the most casual I can be without typing in “dude,” “like,” in random places and phrases like “yeah, no” to mean no… and “no, yeah…” to mean yes. California, right? Gotta prove I’m not AI, amiright?
2. Yes, this style was intentional. No, this isn’t how I usually write. And if you’re a parent or student wondering whether this is how I tutor—rest assured, it’s not!
3. As of this posting, the professor/school has not accused the student of AI– the AI detector accused him of it. I’ll keep you updated… (see how casual that sounded?)
By now, many of us have seen the viral video of the blatant disrespect shown to Miss Mexico, Fátima Bosc, by pageant director Nawat Itsaragrisil. I was so happy to see, not only the strong women of the competition, but also men and women around the world supporting her and condemning Nawat. If you haven’t heard this story, the gist of it is–
Fátima Bosc was elected to represent Mexico in Miss Grand International to take place in Thailand in October 2025. Bosc is a Mexican model and beauty pageant participant known for her work within national pageant competitions. She developed an interest in modeling and personal fitness at a young age, building a public presence through social media and local fashion events. Her confident stage performance and strong communication style helped her advance through state and national pageant circuits.
Miss Grand International was founded by Nawat Itsaragrisil– a television producer and businssman based in Bangkok, Thailand. Nawat launched the pageant with the slogan “Stop War and Violence,” promoting the idea of women coming around the world to promote a more peaceful world. Today, it is one of the most popular pageants alongside Miss Universe and Miss World.
Nawat founded Miss Grand International (MGI) pageant, which he launched in 2013. The competition was built on the vision of creating a modern and interactive pageant, unlike traditional pageants. Nawat has a hands-on leadership style and frequently uses social media to communicate with the public directly addressing controversies and defending the decisions he makes. He has been both praised and criticized by the public for his authenticity but also for his confrontational persona.
What was the conflict between Fátima Bosc and Nawat Itsaragrisil?
Nawat addressed all the ladies encouraging them to not only promote Thailand’s tourism industry, but also promoting his private businesses. It is not unheard of for the contestants to promote their host countries. However, just because Nawat is a sponsor for the pageant, should he also get this “free” promotion from the contestants.
It is not unheard of for contestants to be paid for endorsements. However, they are usually legal contracts between the businesses and the contestants. Bosc simply stated that she must speak to her director before promoting any person, business or cause. This makes sense.
Rather than addressing her concerns privately, he criticized her in front of thousands of viewers. During the livestream he mocked her, calling her a “dumb head” outraging people around the world.
Fátima Bosch, Miss México 2025, fue insultada públicamente por Nawat Itsaragrisil, presidente de Miss Grand Internacional, durante el certamen en Tailandia. El organizador pidió retirarla del lugar. Bosch respondió: “Nadie podrá callar mi voz”. #Latinus#InformaciónParaTi
In solidarity, other contestants followed Bosch leaving the event. Nawat then calls security to close the doors and LOCK THE WOMEN INSIDE THE ROOM WITH HIM!
The situation quickly turned into an online controversy, with fans debating who was in the wrong. Many people supported Bosc and said no contestant deserves to be insulted for speaking about their experience.
Unfortunately, Nawat has not officially faced any consequences via the pageant. He still runs Miss Grand International and is still active on livestreams and social media. However—there were reputational consequences after the conflict with Fátima Bosc and other contestants. Fortunately, he is no longer allowed anywhere near the contestants. According to MUO’s executive decision, Nawat has been restricted from participation in the pageant events for this year.
Who owns Miss Grand International? Miss Grand International was founded by Nawat– I was curious to know who was in charge and why Nawat was not removed from the pageant after this viral incident. He simply faded into the background. So, it turns out… it’s his pageant! What does this mean? It means… it’s his pageant! He is a businessman who just created this pageant. He owns this pageant!
Miss Grand International is run through Miss Grand International Public Company Limited (MGI Group), which has been listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) since 2022. Because it is a public company, it is required to have a Board of Directors, corporate filings, and shareholder meetings. So on paper, yes—there is a board. However, the key point is that Nawat owns the controlling stake, meaning he controls the voting power, appoints board members, and can remove them at any time. As a result, while the board technically exists, it ultimately answers to him, not the other way around. This is why he can fire national directors publicly, criticize contestants openly, change rules without consultation, and make sudden policy decisions—he holds the real power within the organization.
Since this controversy, Nawat has faded into the background. Is he gone completely? Nope. Sadly… it’s his pageant. (Didn’t I already say this?) Maybe with enough pressure, he will be forced to give up his stakes and truly step away from it.
Unfortunately, “what he says goes…” This doesn’t mean he doesn’t suffer consequences for his extreme disrespect for the women recently and in the past (which is well-documented). His reputation in the international community has been shattered– especially in Latin America. He can’t be removed from his own organization, but the backlash he has faced will for sure damage the trust, credibility, and global support of this organization.
Note: This executive’s full name Nawat Itsaragrisil. However, he is usually professionally referred to by his first name Nawat. Nawat has branded himself around his first name. He signs off on livestreams as “Nawat”
In the searing silence after an airstrike, amid the dust and cries, lies a question that haunts the rubble: Can there be justice in war? And if so, who is held accountable when justice seems absent?
Nowhere is this question more visceral than in Gaza, where the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict has entered yet another blood-soaked chapter. With images of bombed-out hospitals, collapsed schools, and children buried under concrete flashing across our screens, a legal—and moral—reckoning looms. Across the world, diplomats, lawyers, and human rights observers are asking: Should Israel be charged with war crimes for its actions in Gaza?
The term war crime is not rhetorical. It has a legal definition under the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law. It denotes violations of the rules that govern the conduct of armed conflict: targeting civilians, using disproportionate force, destroying civilian infrastructure without military necessity, and obstructing humanitarian aid. These are not accusations to be made lightly. But they are not new either.
In recent months, Israel has faced intensifying scrutiny for what many call a campaign of disproportionate retribution. Entire neighborhoods in Gaza—one of the most densely populated regions in the world—have been reduced to ash and twisted steel. The stated target is Hamas, the militant group responsible for deadly attacks on Israeli civilians. Yet the overwhelming force unleashed upon Gaza’s 2.3 million inhabitants, more than half of whom are children, raises a grim question: At what point does self-defense become indiscriminate violence?
In one particularly chilling incident, a refugee camp was bombed in pursuit of a single Hamas commander. The strike flattened buildings and killed dozens, including children. Israeli officials said it was a necessary operation. Critics, including human rights organizations, called it a textbook example of disproportionate force.
These aren’t just the laments of war-weary observers. The International Criminal Court has opened investigations into alleged war crimes by both Israel and Palestinian armed groups. The process is slow, often toothless. But the fact of the investigation matters. It signals that the machinery of justice, however creaky, is engaged.
To some, accusations against Israel amount to political theater, ignoring the atrocities committed by Hamas—suicide bombings, indiscriminate rockets, and hostage-taking. But others argue that accountability must be universal. Justice is not a ledger balanced by who suffered first or most. It is a principle applied without regard to who you are, or which side you fight for.
And so, the question remains: Should Israel be charged with war crimes for its actions in Gaza? The answer may not lie solely in the legal chambers of The Hague, but in our collective willingness to insist that war—even war—has limits.
Because if justice does not reach the rubble of Gaza, where will it reach at all?
References
Amnesty International. Israel/OPT: Unlawful Israeli Attacks Kill Civilians in Their Homes. October 20, 2023. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/israel-opt-unlawful-israeli-attacks-kill-civilians-in-their-homes/
Associated Press. “UN Says 100 Children Are Killed or Injured in Gaza Every Day Since War Resumed.” AP News, April 5, 2025. https://apnews.com/article/un-gaza-children-war-deaths-cc3c58ea21de6a982f20cb82b6e5a2b0
The Guardian. “Israel-Gaza Conflict: IDF Bombing Kills Dozens in Jabalia Refugee Camp.” The Guardian, October 31, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/31/israel-bombing-gaza-jabalia-refugee-camp
Human Rights Watch. Gaza: Israel’s Warnings Do Not Make Strikes Lawful. October 12, 2023. https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/gaza-israels-warnings-do-not-make-strikes-lawful
International Criminal Court. Situation in the State of Palestine. Accessed April 30, 2025. https://www.icc-cpi.int/palestine
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Occupied Palestinian Territory: Humanitarian Needs Overview 2024. United Nations. https://reliefweb.int
United Nations. “Gaza Has Become a ‘Graveyard for Children,’ Says UN Chief.” Al Jazeera, November 6, 2023.
The public library remains one of the last truly inclusive spaces in our community—welcoming to everyone, regardless of race, sexual orientation, or income. It offers a wealth of resources without asking anything in return. It is not a place for political agendas.
I’m not a parent. I’m not a teacher. I’m not a librarian.
I’m a private tutor. I help children thrive—both inside and outside the classroom. Many of the parents I work with are immigrants whose first language isn’t English, and some have resources that most families can only dream of.
One of my students is a nine-year-old who absolutely loves to read. I’ve worked with him since he was four, when he didn’t speak a word of English. I taught him to read. Today, he reads at a 10th-grade level. As someone partially responsible for his education, one of my most important tasks is choosing the books he reads. I stay current on newly published titles, follow his favorite authors, discover rising voices, and research books that reflect his interests—as well as books that challenge him to grow.
This past school year alone, I’ve purchased over $2,000 worth of books for him—ranging from novels and comic books to science texts, historical fiction, and nonfiction. Over his lifetime, it’s probably closer to $10,000. He’s read them all. But the reality is, most parents don’t have that kind of budget.
That’s why many families rely on the public library.
They trust that the books on those shelves were chosen by educated professionals with children’s growth in mind. They trust the library to broaden their kids’ horizons—especially families who didn’t get the chance to read widely themselves and want more for their children.
Immigrant parents. Working-class parents. Parents who may not speak English fluently or have formal education. They trust me to guide their children’s learning. And they trust librarians to do the same.
Librarians do this work not for power or profit, but out of a deep belief in education and access. That’s their job—and they do it well.
This vote was never about “protecting our children”—it was about government overreach, the fight against censorship, and the defense of our fundamental rights.
So when someone tries to turn the library into a political battlefield, it’s not just offensive—it’s dangerous.
Now, I’m not saying you shouldn’t trust the judgment of a teen-mom high school dropout and Chad “Porn Man” Williams to curate your children’s reading material— actually… yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. The choice is ultimately yours– and if a parent wishes to defer their child’s education to these two, I suggest they contact Williams’ office for the time and location for his next book club meeting.
Writer’s Note: Yes, this piece has been reviewed. Yes, I am aware that it may not be the most journalistic piece because I use potty mouth words and point out someone’s lack of qualifications due to the choices they have made in the past… guess what… I DON’T CARE. I know what I’m talking about!
-Kimberly
Huntington Beach is under fire for promoting stupidity once again.
There comes a point where enough is enough. Sure, you have the right to have a say on how your government is run… but do you know how your government actually works? That’s the scary part. You may be voting away your rights and not even know it. Actually… THEY don’t even know that they are voting MY rights away.
As an educator, I am intelligent enough to decide what books the children in my care can read. I am not a public nor a private school teacher; I am a concierge educator whom parents know and trust with their children’s education and intellectual well-being.
Measure A seeks to repeal a City Council ordinance that created a 21-member panel to oversee children’s books in the public library—an unelected, unqualified review board given power over highly educated librarians with degrees such as Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS). Yes… We have a movement that says formal education isn’t everything. But when it comes to educating our children… YES… it is everything!
Measure B protects the library system from privatization, requiring voter approval before city leaders can outsource this essential public service. Actually… it doesn’t “protect” anyone or anything.
If you want to “protect” YOUR child… that’s YOUR right. I, however, don’t believe in raising a generation of children in a censored world. Go ahead and make the decisions for your child, but don’t tout signs with the words “PORN” in large all over the city and talk about protecting kids. Now we have kids asking their parents, “Mommy… what’s porn?” Good call on that, by the way… As I have said before, if you think a picture of a child showing his shoulders playing with a boat in the bathtub is porn… then maybe YOU’RE the one with the problem.
There are intelligent parents who want the best and brightest future for their children, and they know that censoring and “protecting” their child from literature, current events, history, and knowledge is NOT the best for their children. Do what you want with your kids, but leave the others alone. If the public library, with free books to educate children, no matter their racial or economic background, is too controversial for you… go buy your kids their own damn books. Be careful at Barnes and Noble, though, they might have those spicy romance novels for all you soccer moms out there… you know, the ones with about… the plumber and his “little buddy” helping the mom find her “pussy cat” while daddy’s at work?
Okay… let’s say the library respects the education and experience of our librarians, but you still think your child needs to be protected. I’m sorry… do YOU not know how to read? Clearly not… especially if you think Boats Afloat and Everyone Poops is pornographic.
Shame. If anyone needs this library, it’s you. If we’re going to be so quick to judge the intelligence of other people… I am NOT trusting a high-school dropout teen mom (not mentioning names) decide what’s best for the kids of Huntington Beach.
I leave you with the words of a 19th-century poet, writer, and literary critic (whom your child will know if you don’t ban their books)
“Those who burn books will in the end burn people.” -Heinrich Heine
WARNING: This article will likely offend readers who oppose intellectual freedom and inclusive, science-backed education.
Huntington Beach city council members want to ban books claiming they are “porn.” There is no porn at the library in the children’s section. What are some books they have categorized as porn?
Let’s be clear: there is no pornography in these books! Everyone Poops by Taro Gomi teaches children about a natural bodily function with humor and honesty. Your One and Only Heart by award winning Dr. Rajani LaRocca explores anatomy in poetic, accessible terms. The Way We Work by David Macaulay explains the human body in ways that engage children without shame or sensationalism.
Yes on prop A & B would
Eliminate the proposed Community Parent Guardian Review Board, which was intended to review and approve children’s and teen library materials based on community standards regarding sexual content. If you want to withhold information and education from your child. Do it. But not at the library. Build your own library. Do that there.
Transfer the responsibility for selecting library materials to professional librarians, who would follow established policies emphasizing a diverse range of viewpoints and adherence to the First Amendment– You know… the people who went to college.
Some children are raised by single parents—fathers raising daughters, mothers raising sons—who rely on these books to fill gaps in their own understanding or comfort levels. These books offer scientifically sound, inclusive ways to help kids understand what is happening to their bodies. Removing them from reach doesn’t protect kids; it leaves them in the dark.
You think kids are going to ask their parents, “Mommy… What’s porn?” Oh, yes! They will… and they have! Thanks to political posters all over Huntington Beach, including in school zones.
Or perhaps it’s simply that they’re uncomfortable with boats. Yes… they want to ban books about boats.
Rajani LaRocca’s Your One and Only Heart, a nonfiction picture book that explains the scientific importance of the human heart to children in poetic and lyrical terms.
Meanwhile, books with actual explicit content—like adult romance novels—remain openly available on spinning racks just steps away. If the concern is access to sexual content, then the city council should start there. But they won’t because this is not about protecting kids. It’s about controlling narratives.
Steamy romance books aren’t out in the open for anyone to grab and sit at any table to read. Oh, wait. They are. Adults can even take them to the children’s and teen section and just read them right there. They can even check them out. All you need is to be at least 13 years old and have a library card. Are these book Nazis going to stand at the door and check each book as they leave the library?
Are we going to move on to Danielle Steel after shoving all these boat books in the some dark corner in the basement of the library? Why aren’t we looking at these books first? Or are we just not going to bother with them? Rights and all, you know. It seems like that would be more of a priority. Why are we looking at books that educate children? There has been no good group in the past that has banned books. Please tell me a group that is generally good. The Nazis? The commies? The KGB? The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea? (To clarify… that’s North Korea)
If this is something that you’re going to do in our public library, why don’t we start with Fabio or Bared to You? At least put it behind the XXX curtains like those video rental places had in the 90s. Make sure it gives out a loud “ding dong” when someone sneaks in. Gotta make sure mommy’s a grown-up.
So the plan is to take the responsibility of selecting library books out of the hands of trained, experienced librarians—many with advanced degrees—and hand it over to someone who didn’t even finish high school because she got pregnant as a teenager. (No names, of course.)
We’re not quite there yet… but that’s clearly the direction we’re heading. For now, the books are just being hidden. Soon, librarians may have no authority at all over what stays on the shelves. Why rely on educated professionals when we can defer to a high school dropout to decide which books matter and which ones don’t?
Don’t tell me… “Oh, we’re just going to move the books into the basement or the adult section…” Have you been in that library’s basement? The adult section? Do they need to know how the science of the human body works, too? Well, they should. They can go into the kid’s section. No Shame!
This is just the beginning– when you start controlling the access to books, you start banning books, and that’s a slippery slope to idiotocracy.
Don’t ban boats. Don’t ban biology. And don’t let fear make fools of us all.
Note: I went ahead and submitted an episode idea to the creators of South Park.
The Irish rap group Kneecap continued to stir controversy during Coachella’s second weekend, criticizing Israel over its war in Gaza and leading a “free Palestine” chant during their performance. The group also projected anti-Israel-agression statements onto the Sonora tent backdrop.
These projections, reportedly used during the first weekend as well, appeared to prompt the cutoff of the band’s livestream. By the second weekend, sets in the Sonora tent were no longer streamed—presumably in response to the messaging.
The projections read: “Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people. It is being enabled by the U.S. government who arm and fund Israel despite their war crimes. Fuck Israel; free Palestine.”
While the initial weekend saw limited reaction, the second weekend drew greater scrutiny. Numerous online commentators demanded that Coachella organizers Goldenvoice and parent company AEG Presents address the incident.
Representatives for both companies did not immediately respond to Variety’s requests for comment.
Last week, the band claimed on X that Coachella had censored their protest, but reassured followers that they would be “back next Friday” and that the matter would “be sorted.” During their second-weekend set, the group led a “free, free Palestine” chant and declared, “the Irish are not so longer persecuted under the Brits, but we were never bombed under the fucking skies with nowhere to go.”
Kneecap was not the only act to voice support for Palestinians. British punk duo Bob Vylan displayed a Palestinian flag during their first weekend set and also commented on Gaza. The duo also performed in the Sonora tent, though it’s unclear whether similar messages were delivered.
Former music executive Scooter Braun, who last year helped stage an exhibit in Israel and Los Angeles about the October 7 Hamas attacks, took to Instagram to defend Goldenvoice founder Paul Tollett.
“This is my friend Paul Tollett, the founder of [Coachella],” Braun wrote in a Sunday post. “He is someone who lives and breathes the festival community. He fights for artists and he fights for all people. When I invited him to the opening of the Nova music exhibit in Los Angeles, he was the first person from the industry to accept. He came on his own time and spent five hours in the exhibit and then met with survivors of nova and invited them to the festival this year as his guest. He cried with them, he laughed with them, and he continues to advocate for them. Let’s not lose sight of who this man is, and let us stand with him in this moment when a group, without his knowing, took advantage of his festival and created hate in a place that’s filled with love.”
1. Mass Civilian Casualties in Gaza
Over 30,000 Palestinians, including thousands of children and civilians, have been killed in the 2023–2024 Gaza conflict (according to Gaza’s Health Ministry).
The scale and intensity of Israeli airstrikes in densely populated areas are cited as evidence of disproportionate force.
2. Forced Displacement and Starvation
Israeli military orders for civilians to evacuate large areas of Gaza have displaced over 1.8 million people.
Humanitarian agencies report that Israel has severely restricted access to food, water, and medicine, contributing to famine-like conditions—which some experts argue can qualify as genocidal acts (e.g., Article II(c) of the Genocide Convention: “Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group…”).
3. Destruction of Infrastructure
Systematic targeting of hospitals, schools, refugee camps, and homes may be viewed as acts aimed at dismantling Palestinian society in Gaza.
4. Statements by Israeli Officials
Some international lawyers and UN officials (like UN special rapporteur Francesca Albanese) have cited statements by Israeli political and military leaders that dehumanize Palestinians or suggest an intent to wipe out entire communities. For example:
Defense officials describing the need to “flatten Gaza.”
Politicians referring to Palestinians as “human animals.”
