THE BALLAD OF RICK AND JOHNNY

Cash and Rubin's amazing grace; Florida, for shame; Tom Cruise gets his head examined; Fran Lebowitz's faith-based initiative; the crumbling of the Pentagon stud muffin; and more

David Kamp's "American Communion" [October], about the unique relationship between singer Johnny Cash and his producer Rick Rubin, was one of the most spiritually affecting tributes that I have ever read. What I found particularly inspiring was the Holy Communion ritual shared by Cash, a devout Christian, and Rubin, born Jewish and now having no allegiance to any specific religion. Kamp had to carefully note that Rubin is "not technically eligible to receive the sacrament." Well, maybe not by the rules of the established church. But the Jesus I believe in was more liberal than most of his followers. I believe Jesus would have said, "Well, that's all right with me."

ROBERT P. STOCKTON Charleston, South Carolina

JOHNNY CASH was an inspiration to us all. His dedication to his art and his faith was beyond reproach. I do not find myself to be a religious person, but I did find myself weeping at the story of Mr. Cash and Mr. Rubin's friendship. In these times of trouble, I look to truth and beauty for inspiration and spiritual guidance. Since there seems to be so little of it, I must look to my cultural heroes to provide it.

CASSANDRA WILTSHIRE Silver Lake, California

IN 1993,1 WAS a recent college graduate with aspirations to be in the music business. I had the good fortune of landing a job as Rick Rubin's assistant's assistant. During my tenure at Rick's house, I met, or at least talked on the phone with, a number of musical legends (Donovan, Tom Petty, George Harrison, and Joe Cocker, to name a few), but it was Johnny Cash who tops my list. Kamp's article brought me back to the time when I worked in the makeshift office space of Rick's dining room, located less than 10 feet from the living room, where Rick and Johnny Cash were recording American Recordings.

My fondest memory of John, as he liked to be called, occurred one early afternoon in Rick's kitchen. John came in and noticed that I was wearing a wrist brace, so he asked in his Tennessee drawl, "Well, what happened to you?" I explained that I had been to a roller-skating party the night before and had fallen. He replied, in an endearing, grandfatherly way, "Bless your little heart." That has always made me feel special. Johnny Cash was a kind and wise man, a musical genius, and I feel blessed to have borne witness to the creative process that he and Rick shared.

MEGAN SHAW West Hollywood, California

WHAT A MEANINGFUL GIFT Rubin gave to the elder singer. Though there are many lucky souls on earth who are in a position to help an artist bloom in a new way, Rick Rubin actually does it!

How refreshing that Rubin leads a straight and grounded life despite general preconceived notions of what "cool" is. I look forward to listening to those great new musical gifts from these kindred spirits.

DAWN KAST Park Rapids, Minnesota

WHEN I WAS AT N.Y.U., Rick used to visit the guy in the dorm room next to ours and have impromptu jam sessions. It seems that he always had a guitar and amp with him. He was a quiet guy, yet friendly. I do remember the neighbor's "trash can" booze parties, and Rick never did imbibe.

I was one of the few blacks in our dorm, but I never realized that Rick had cofounded Def Jam with Russell Simmons. He has worked with such a variety of musicians that it's truly amazing. Rick, you are one cool "brother."

LORY GARDNER Glendale, Arizona

AFTER READING David Kamp's eloquent article describing the relationship between Rick Rubin and Johnny Cash, I swallowed the lump in my throat and listened.

This article was written in the way a musician composes a song.

CATHERINE LANDRY Ottawa, Ontario

THE TAKING OF FLORIDA 2000

WE TRUSTED the Supreme Court justices to uphold our Constitution and to be above the fray created by our political parties ["The Path to Florida," by David Margolick, Evgenia Peretz, and Michael Shnayerson, October]. We thought of them as the moral and ethical backbone of our nation.

Their behavior in the election of 2000 was anything but ethical, and created a moral vacuum in our nation that we may not be able to fill. We can no longer trust our electoral process, nor can we trust the Supremes. Perhaps we should ask the United Nations or the Organization of American States to send impartial observers to the polls in Florida for the 2004 elections to ensure that the process is fair. If the U.N. and the O.A.S. are not available, maybe we can call back our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and send them to monitor our own democratic process in the foreign nation that Florida seems to have become.

Before we make the world "safe for democracy," we better be sure our own democracy is safe and sound.

DR. SILVIA ELIAS Elizabeth, New Jersey

LAST WEEKEND, like more than 10 million other Australians, I went down to my local school and voted in our national election. Just like other voters, I used a stubby pencil to number squares on a ballot paper. Low-tech, but effective.

While I was not cheering the result of this election, I have no quibble with the manner in which it was conducted. What a contrast to your own unhappy situation.

Australians were stunned by the Florida fiasco in 2000. It opened our eyes to the corruptibility inherent in a system so different from our own. I was genuinely incredulous to learn that openly partisan people are elected to supervise elections (huh?); that different counties use different technologies to record votes (what?); that ballots could be redesigned by local officials (excuse me?); that there were no uniform rules for determining the validity of votes (??!!); and that party-political state officials manage (and selectively purge) the electoral roll and certify poll results. You have got to be joking, right?

And yet few lessons seem to have been learned since then. I mean—machines that leave no paper trail? It is time you looked beyond America's borders to discover the fallibility of your own design.

I find it even more disturbing that this corrupt American version of "democracy" is being thrust upon developing nations, as if Americans alone know some universal truth. From my viewpoint, your system appears so inherently open to corruption that it defies the very definition of equal-representation democracy.

ANNA JOHNSTON Crows Nest, Australia

WITH REFERENCE to your article "The Path to Florida," please advise where I should send each of the authors a case of Kleenex.

You're right when you say that the overvote would have swung the election to Gore. But do you really believe that they should have been recounted? Most of the 100,000plus overvotes were cast by Democrats stupid enough to vote for two candidates for the same office on one ballot. Such voters do not deserve to have their votes recounted.

u also made a big deal out of Gore's winning the popular vote. May I remind you that in 1960 J.F.K. won the popular vote by a hair, and Richard Nixon declined to investigate the charges of vote stealing in Texas and Chicago. I believe history will record L.B.J.

as the biggest vote stealer of all time, with the Dems of Daley of Chicago a close second. Everybody knows that the residents of Chicago cemeteries voted at least twice.

JACK LADKY Milwaukee, Wisconsin

PERHAPS THE IMPROBABLE devastation of three hurricanes in one month is nature's way of telling Jeb Bush that something's wrong, that there is indeed a price to pay for manipulating an election that ensured his brother the presidency. As it is, he appears untouched by the legal, moral, and ethical havoc he has wreaked on his constituency. How many insults can the residents of Florida continue to tolerate?

CAROL M. JOHNSON Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina

FOR 98 PERCENT OF NEWSPAPERS and "news" television, the Florida recount has been a non-story. As soon as Bush was in the White House, this mess was forgotten. Now, in 2004, brother Jeb is still governor, and four hurricanes have left thousands homeless. In the western edge of the Florida Panhandle, more than 6,000 homes were destroyed by Ivan. Few who have no home will vote. We did see the president fly over in Air Force One when we were without water, power, and phones. He was on the ground for less than two hours. Jeb returned to reopen the destroyed 1-10 bridge, talk to schoolchildren, and walk through a shelter. Both made sure plenty of photos were taken. Meanwhile, not much has been done to correct the corruption from the previous presidential election.

GLORIA GONZALEZ Pensacola, Florida

AS WE HEAD into another contentious election, Vanity Fair seems to be one of the few mainstream publications willing to remind us that in today's political climate our most sacred right and duty as Americans, the right to vote, is in danger. Thanks for presenting these complicated issues in enough detail to help readers understand the gravity of what happened in 2000, and for convincing us that we should still care.

LIGIA GIESE Berkeley, California

THE POLITICS OF MONEY

IT IS DEEPLY DISTRESSING to read the number of names in your New Establishment list that state George W. Bush as their candidate in 2004 ["The New Establishment 2004," October], I was especially surprised to see the following names: Bill Gates, Meg Whitman, Steve Ballmer, Richard Parsons, and Michael Dell. These chairmen and C.E.O.'s, whose companies are considered innovative and forward-thinking, are clearly drinking the same Kool-Aid. How sad to see these supposed industry thought leaders backing a thoughtless leader for four more potentially dangerous years for the entire world.

RAY MCKENZIE Chicago, Illinois

I AM AN ARDENT FAN of your magazine, but I was seriously disturbed by what I read in this month's "The New Establishment 2004." The small blurb on Tom Cruise stated he had joined the Scientology-backed campaign against psychiatry. It further quoted him as saying, "I think psychiatry should be outlawed. I think it's an utter waste of time. There's nothing scientific about it."

As a psychiatrist committed to education and public-sector work and deeply concerned about stigma and family/patient advocacy, I find these comments extremely offensive. While I commend Tom Cruise's efforts as a private citizen in trying to help out by creating a program (albeit one with dubious scientific underpinnings) for 9/11 rescue workers, I do have a problem with his statements. Given his popularity and V.F.'s huge circulation, his words carry weight. My concern is that readers and fans alike, if suffering from a mental illness, might actually believe what he says and shun the help they need and deserve to have access to.

Mental illnesses are serious, debilitating, and painful disorders, and the mentalhealth profession is an increasingly more complex field of medicine. Although popular misconceptions are rampant, and stigma still a major cause of not seeking treatment, these are not based on the latest scientific understandings of psychiatry, psychology, and behavior. Having spent the last 10 years seeing the ravages of mental illness, as well as the benefits and positive outcomes of our treatments, I cannot understand how an important and popular public figure could make such ignorant remarks.

JORGE R. PETIT, M.D. New York, New York

FAITH THE NATION

THANK YOU,VANITY FAIR, for including an excerpt from Fran Lebowitz's book Progress in your October issue ["Is Everything Sacred?"]. What Lebowitz writes is relevant to current political discourse. Not only do I wholeheartedly agree that the recent phenomenon of the religious right undercuts the constitutional separation of church and state, but I also agree with her broader proposition that religion in a governmental context restricts imagination (and progress).

Which leads me to this country's current leadership crisis. In Progress Lebowitz claims that our nation has "fallen into the hands of the sort of politician given to triumphantly, and with the air of someone coining an epigram, the making of such statements as 'The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.' " I am left to wonder if this is a Bush quote. Regardless, I find it horrifying that any influential politician possesses such a crude and inaccurate understanding of our constitutional guarantees.

For an administration that survives on brainless and oversimplified catchphrases such as "they hate our freedoms," it would seem that the previous contortion of "freedom" in the context of church and state constitutes a grave hypocrisy. This is especially true considering Bush's limitless strides in his policymaking to appease religious fanatics. Apparently, as Americans, we have the freedom to choose a religion, but not to disbelieve. Gays have the freedom to (hypothetically) be drafted to serve in the military in a time of war, but not to serve openly, to adopt children, or to marry. In addition, Bush's shoddy definition of freedom does not include a woman's right to choose, as evidenced in his reinstatement of Reagan's "Mexico City" policy. And let us not forget the myriad of constitutional challenges the Bush administration has faced because of its wanton discrimination against Arab-American males following 9/11.

All said, a pat on the back to you, Vanity Fair, and to Fran Lebowitz. I can't wait to read her book in its entirety.

JASON CARTER HATCHER Boston, Massachusetts

AS A CHRISTIAN MINISTER, I share Fran Lebowitz's concern that our nation has fallen into the hands of politicians who are triumphant in their religiosity and oppressive in their particular brand of Christian belief. But I don't agree with her blanket statements that "where there is less religion there is more progress" or that "the only people who are really tolerant of other people's religions are people who are really not that religious."

Having been an ordained United Church of Christ pastor for 24 years, I consider myself and the congregation I serve as really religious. We also believe, in the words of an old hymn, in a God whose compassion and love extend beyond "our poor reach of mind" to include all God's children, regardless of race, color, or creed. Although I am deeply committed to my faith and my ministry, I am also deeply indebted to persons of other traditions, including the rabbi who encouraged me to enter the seminary and Buddhist leaders such as Thich Nhat Hanh who challenge Christians to follow in Jesus's way of peace and acceptance.

Ms. Lebowitz yearns for the good old days of marches on Washington and a "citizenry too engaged by the demands of democracy to be lured by the commands of religion." Yet many of the progressive movements of this country, from abolition to labor reforms to the civil-rights struggle, started as religious movements. The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. and other Christian and Jewish leaders organized the 1963 March on Washington because of the biblical command to "love one's neighbor as one's self" and to "let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." To deny the religious foundation of their commitment to democracy only lets the current demagogues Lebowitz decries get the last word.

THE REVERENDTALITHA ARNOLD The United Church of Santa Fe Santa Fe, New Mexico

RUMSFELD IN RETREAT

DONALD RUMSFELD had that seductive charm most people fall for: an incisive manner and piercing intellect that bring things into a cohesive whole ["Rummy on the Rocks," by James Wolcott, October], People believed that this had to be a powerful guy with a plan. His decisive actions led to the mess in Iraq and Abu Ghraib. But somewhere Rumstud's still working it. The situation didn't spell immediate resignation but only a low profile.

It seems his wrestling prowess allowed him to believe that his thoughts and decisions were paramount and that he had to listen only to people who agreed with him. This imagined old-man warrior couldn't understand that decisiveness, coupled with power and the ability to change and adapt when grave mistakes occur, is lasting sexual appeal—with substance.

Rumsfeld has to "stay wrong." It is not in his nature to accept that he can really he wrong. He is a window which provides a glimpse into the soul of the Bush administration.

NICO COLSON-JONES Brooklyn, New York

THE NUMBERS GAME

GRAYDON CARTER'S indictment of the Bush administration's employment record ["Big Job Losses in the Bush League," October] focuses on job creation per month instead of the unemployment rate, and I think I know why. This administration has steered us through a recession and corporate scandals that it inherited from the Clinton administration (as well as the crippling effect of 9/11). Yet, the unemployment rate in August was 5.4 percent, a low rate by any measurement. Eight years ago when Clinton was running for re-election on the platform of a strong economy, the August rate was 5.1 percent, a historically insignificant difference. The unemployment rate would certainly be higher now were it not for the tax cuts that Carter castigates in paragraph one. And if that were the case, Carter would be discussing the unemployment rate. Anything to spin against the Bush administration.

JOSH HARRISON Southborough, Massachusetts

MR. CARTER, I would like to express to you my deep appreciation for the way in which, through your editorials and the articles in the magazine you so ably direct, you have presented the truth about the corruption in the current administration.

I know you will continue this important work at this time of such severe national crisis, and in the time left before the election, I hope you will also continue your work toward a fair election.

DORA IREGUI Mount Shasta, California

TAKING THE LOW GROUND

"WHAT IF BUSH WINS?," by Michael Wolff [October], was troubling but gave some comfort as well. The idea of a Bush victory is hard to accept when you feel passionately that the country is going in the wrong direction and that John Kerry can alter the course. Nevertheless, the Bush campaign has made this a referendum on terrorism, playing to and cleverly manipulating fears. The hate motivator is a sad commentary on political discourse today, but it seems red meat is still the stuff of victory. Political vegans are wimps. I would rather see Bush gone in 2004, but I agree that Bush-bashing will be a way of life for the Democrats in the second W. administration. The opposite of love isn't hate, it's apathy. Awake, ye Democrats, from your apathy—otherwise you have to wait another four years.

STEVEN A. LUDSIN East Hampton, New York

I HAVE BEEN A LOYAL SUBSCRIBER to Vanity Fair for more than a decade. It saddens me to know that you have fallen into the abyss of discriminating and partisan allegiance. Now, every month, without even looking at the cover, I know that there will be articles bashing President Bush. The caricature accompanying Michael Wolff's "What if Bush Wins?" depicted President Bush as a dragon being fended off by people with raised torches. This and the article itself clearly support my point that you have now become a liberal and biased magazine. Further, criticism of John Kerry and his political record seems to be absent from your reporting on the presidential election.

LEE KENT MILLS Concord, North Carolina

THE POLITICS OF DENIAL

CAN DEFENSE DEPARTMENT spokesman Lawrence Di Rita possibly be serious ["Letters," September]? When he says "time will tell," is he really still trying to convince us that the W.M.D. will miraculously show up in Iraq? That all will become clear about why we invaded Iraq in pursuit of Saddam Hussein when we did, diverting most of our resources from finding and stopping al-Qaeda?

Yes, Mr. Di Rita, the administration is being held to account, and with good reason. Our servicemen and women are spilling their precious blood in a country which, prior to our invasion, did not pose an immediate threat to our nation. And al-Qaeda, which obviously does pose an immediate threat, has been relegated to the bottom of the administration's to-do list. Do you really have the gall to suggest that this administration is not accountable?

We are now in an impossible position in Iraq. We can't figure out why we are there in the first place, and yet now we must stay and fight because morally we cannot leave the Iraqi people to deal with the chaos we have created. In fact, we must step up our troop levels if we are to have even a hope of success. And, for all that, al-Qaeda is as capable of attack, and as likely to attack, as it was on September 10, 2001.

Mr. Di Rita, we have paid, are paying, and will continue to pay the highest price for this administration's mistakes and misinformation. Do not make it worse by insulting our intelligence and telling us that the W.M.D. are out there somewhere. Just give it up. We're sick to death of it.

DENISE KEARNEY

Bronxville, New York

CORRECTIONS: On page 203 of the April issue ("Daughters of France, Daughters of Allah"), we incorrectly state that Asma Lamrabet's book, Musulmane Tout Simplement, condones the stoning of women who commit adultery. We apologize for the error.

Letters to the editor should be sent electronically with the writer's name, address, and daytime phone number to letters@vf.com. Letters to the editor will also be accepted via fax at 212-2864324. All requests for back issues should be sent to FAIR@neodata.com. All other queries should be sent to vfmail@vf.com. The magazine reserves the right to edit submissions, which may be published or otherwise used in any medium. All submissions become the property of Vanity Fair.