Miley Cyrus is no Adam Lambert … at least according to “Good Morning America.” After simulating a girl-on-girl kiss while on “Britain’s Got Talent” two weeks ago (bottom left), the 17-year-old pop sensation performed on ‘GMA’ today (top).
Interesting move … considering they banned Adam Lambert from performing back in November after he kissed a male band member on the American Music Awards (bottom right).
Translation: Heterosexual underage female singer simulating a lesbian kiss = good. Gay male singer actually kissing a man = bad.
“I’m not trying to be ‘slutty,'” said Cyrus in a recent interview. “I’m not trying to be like, go to the club and get a bunch of guys … What I’m trying to do is to make a point with my record and look consistent, in the way my record sounds and the way I dress.”
What she wears has been put under the spotlight recently. Some thought the video for “Can’t Be Tamed” was too provocative, and others have criticized her for revealing too much skin in her outfits. Cyrus admits to being partial to shorts and hot pants. But she sees nothing wrong with flashing her legs. “I’m really comfortable with my body, I work really hard to be fit and to know that I can wear whatever makes me most comfortable. I feel more comfortable dressing with a little less, which is just how I’ve always been,” she said. “Now I’m able to do that a little more freely and, also, I’ve just grown up to be this way too. It’s not like this was me five years ago. It’s me now, presently.”
Maturing is Cyrus’ current mission. She’ll finally shed the blonde wig of her Disney pop star persona, “Hannah Montana,” when it ends this year. Then Cyrus will be free to embrace her solo stardom and sex appeal. “When you’re 11, the word you would use to describe someone is definitely not sexy, and as you get older I think you grow into that. And I think I’ve done that but that’s not my schtick. That’s not what I’m trying to do to sell records. I want people to buy my record because of my music.”
I wasn’t aware that Nebraska had an immigration problem, but apparently there’s plenty of open jobs in the mid-west. Angered by a recent influx of Hispanic workers attracted by jobs at local meatpacking plants, voters in this eastern Nebraska will decide Monday whether to ban hiring or renting property to illegal immigrants.
The vote will be the culmination of a two-year fight that saw proponents collect enough signatures to put the question to a public vote. If the ordinance is approved, the community of 25,000 people could face a long and costly court battle. Either way, the emotions stirred up won’t settle quickly. “Even if we say ‘no’ … we still need to say, ‘How do we get along with each other now?’ ” said Kristin Ostrom, who helps oversee a campaign against the measure.
Across the nation, people have been outraged by — and demanded action against — the poor enforcement of federal laws to prevent illegal immigration. A law recently introduced in Arizona requires police to question people on their immigration status if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” they are illegal. Immigration is one of the issues likely to be a factor in this November’s mid-term Congressional elections.
A man who helped write the Arizona law is helping to fight for the ordinance in Fremont, which has seen its Hispanic population surge in the past two decades. That increase is largely because they were recruited to work for the Fremont Beef and Hormel plants, and the city maintains an enviably low unemployment rate. Nonetheless, residents worry that jobs are going to illegal immigrants who they fear could drain community resources.
Clint Walraven, who has lived in Fremont all his 51 years, said the jobs should go to legal residents who are unemployed — something he believes the ordinance would help fix. Discussions on the issue can get heated, he said, particularly if racism is mentioned. “It has nothing to do with being racist,” Walraven said. “We all have to play by the same rules. … If you want to stay here, get legal.”