I needed to pinch myself. I caught myself partially agreeing with two Democratic Party politicians. And I generally do not like politicians from either of the two old parties.

An email came in from state Reps. Jared Solomon and Chris Rabb, both representing legislative districts in Philadelphia, calling for open primaries in Pennsylvania. Yes, open primaries are needed. As it stands now with our closed primary system in Pennsylvania, only people registered as Democrats or Republicans can vote in a primary unless there’s a special election involved, or some ballot question needs to be addressed before the general election.

But even though others are denied voting in those regular primaries, their tax money still goes to paying for them. How democratic is that? Ever heard of taxation without representation?

Solomon and Rabb say opening primaries to independents, those not affiliated with either of the two old parties, will “let us embrace democracy.” Up to a point, that’s true. But only up to a point.

I’ll single out Democrats right now, but this applies to Republicans as well. If they truly want inclusiveness in voting, stop making it so difficult for other political parties to get candidates on the ballot. And why did the two state representatives only mention independents, D’s and R’s? Greens, Libertarians, and others are locked out of voting in primaries, too. And that makes for some incredibly silly situations.

One of those situations was manifest this spring in the primary election for West Chester Area School Board. Dr. Peggy Schmitt, a dentist, was on the ballot. She’s a Libertarian, but Libertarians don’t conduct primaries. Libertarians choose candidates in municipal, county, state, and national conventions, and meetings. So, Schmitt ran in the Republican primary and won a slot on the November ballot. But because she’s a Libertarian, Schmitt was prohibited from voting in the primary where she was a candidate.

So much for an inclusive democracy. But it gets worse. How can anyone claim to be in favor of a democracy when ballot access is rigged?

Yes, rigged.

In Pennsylvania, a Republican or Democrat running for state representative needs 300 signatures to be on a ballot, but any third-party candidate needs 2 percent of the total vote in a previous election. The law reads: “Candidates filing nomination papers must obtain signatures from electors of the district equal to at least 2 percent of the largest entire vote cast for an elected candidate in the last election within the district.” (See ballotpedis. org)

“This is a great example of how poorly our state laws are written,” said Dan Truitt, a former GOP state representative and now the chairman of the Chester County Libertarian Party. “Is it the last election or the last election for the same office? Is it really for an "elected candidate" or a single position?”

But even getting the 2 percent of whatever election isn’t good enough since the leadership from both old parties will challenge the signatures received so a third-party candidate would be disqualified for not getting the right number. Democrats and Republicans hate competition from outsiders. (They only tolerate one another because they need the other to blame when their policies fail.)

Not very democratic. And it gets worse, still. Consider presidential elections and those bogus debates.

The two old parties took control of those debates from the League of Women Voters, so it became a rigged game. Being on the ballot of all 50 states isn’t good enough to be included in the debates, according to the Presidential Debate Commission — which is made up of Democrats and Republicans. No. Candidates must get at least 15 percent in five different polls, but any poll that includes a third-party candidate is disqualified for consideration by the Commission.

And it can get even dumber when we consider some of those high-profile rank-and-file government worshippers. Consider this tweet from the not-so-funny Rob Reiner.

If Donald Trump is found guilty of any wrongdoing, then yes, he should be disqualified from running for office. But to ban third-party candidates is so far from democratic that Reiner should be ashamed of himself. But he’s not. His statement simply shows that he has no regard for democracy even though he calls for it and that he is grossly hypocritical on the subject.

One last thing. This country is not a democracy, and it was never intended to be a democracy. The Constitution clearly states that the U.S. is to be a republic. Use of the word democracy is intellectual laziness at best, and deliberate and fraudulent manipulation at worst.

Things can only get better with opinions other than those of the faulty left/right nonsense. And open primaries? As long as taxpayers fund primaries, all registered voters regardless of any, or no party affiliation should be eligible to vote in those primaries.