and will be enduring despite their egotistical imperfections and not because of them. (Oh and also because Whitney had the sense to have the breakdown first, (sort-of) get over it and then talk about it on Oprah, unlike Britney and her hopefully now-fired publicist, whom allowed the whole thing to be treated like a live-to-air LAPD stolen vehicle pursuit.) Whilst the Christina v. Brittany argument is thankfully just a bad memory circa 2000, the reason that artists like Christina work so well on TV is because, where 'infamy' lacks poise, 'fame' is poise. Brittany really does look like she won some mid-size southern-state beauty contest because she has about as much poise as a 1 legged millipede, and fortunately that just makes Christina look like Miss-fucking-America, and it is obvious that Christina is about a whole lot more than just "world peace" to boot -- strange, considering they were both mouseketeers! So Miley Cyrus, what do you want to be babe? Famous or Infamous? Christina or Britney? " To me, Britney has never been a silly pop singer or a record-selling money machine created by music execs. I see her as a pioneer of a segment of the industry, which never existed before she invented it. Granted, she's had a lot of help, but anyone who thinks you become this successful just by following orders needs a reality check. Britney might seem like an airhead but she's anything but. With everything she's gone through -- from adolescent fame and sainthood