Thursday, February 03, 2005

I almost hesitate
to say anything, because I don't want to start trouble; but... I am wondering if the 2005 Catholic Blog Awards are as "above board," as transparent as they should be. I was just reading over the guidelines and I noticed that a few blogs are mentioned by name as examples of a nominating procedure. In particular, "A Saintly Salmagundi" is named at least a couple of times. Is that a good idea, I wonder? I mean, couldn't that be taken as a suggestion by Awards personnel regarding who to nominate? Could that be viewed as Awards personnel revealing their leanings and trying to influence the nomination process?

I mean what would the world say if election ballots, upon being given to voters, were already filled for a particular candidate, or were already checked in affirmation of a particular proposal? Nevermind. I guess that has been tried in Iraq in the past and I guess we know what some of the world says about that.

What if Simon put aside his normal snarking bitterness and just lavished praise upon a particular American idol candidate from start to finish, never even giving another candidate a chance?

What if male judges at the Miss American Pageant didn't even acknowledge the talent (baton twirling routine) and intelligence ("How I plan to save the world" speech) of contestants and simply chose the one that had most sex appeal, looked best in a skimpy bathing suit, and seemed most likely to sleep with them?

I mean wouldn't we call in Jimmy Carter to monitor these election/selection processes? I just don't want the Catholic Blog Awards to be viewed as the trumped up party of some Banana Republic.

I suppose the only solution is for all of you to overwhelmingly nominate CRM for the appropriate categories and then to rally the voters to keep it all above board!

No comments: