Should Bonds be an all-star?

All-Star Game fan voting is coming to a close. Tomorrow is the last day ballots will be counted. And the question on everyone’s minds is, should Barry Bonds be an all-star?

Pretty much everybody thinks so. Except, you know, a majority of the fans.

Take a look at what the media and some former players are saying:

Cal Ripken, Jr.: Yes, there’s a shadow that’s hanging over top of him. The commissioner and Hank Aaron are torn whether they should celebrate the breaking of the all-time home run record. But when I think of Barry, I think of him as an all-star player.

• Tony Gwynn: There has to be one guy from each team, and there’s no question, I think, he’s having the best year on that team.
• John Ames, Arizona Daily Star: The All-Star Game is a popularity contest, and Bonds is the game’s biggest draw. People love Bonds. Most love to boo him…. The All-Star Game this year will be played in Bonds’ home park. His biggest fans should not be denied a chance to see him there.
• Gene Wojciechowski: MLB rules say that each team has to have at least one All-Star representative. The Giants, who will finish dead last in the NL West, need somebody, so that somebody ought to be Mr. Martyr instead of the other two San Francisco candidates: catcher Bengie Molina and pitcher Matt Morris.

I understand where these pro-Bonds guys are coming from. It makes sense that as long as Bonds is allowed to play in regular season games, he should be allowed to play in the All-Star game. And it makes sense that as long as Bonds is the best player on the Giants, he should represent the team at the All-Star game.

But I can’t help it. Every time MLB heaps one more honor on Barry, I get a little sick to my stomach. The guy should have been banned long ago. Now, not only do we have to endure his pursuit of Hank Aaron’s home run record, but we have to give him a place at the All-Star game?