Where's the party?

I have been out of school now for just about a week but have not blogged until now.
Partly, I needed to re-group, and, partly, I just haven't known what to write about lately.
I'm holding off on writing about the theatre scene at the moment, because, in my present frame of mind I would probably over-use words like "pandering", "limpid", and "shallow," and, I'd rather not do that right now.
I expect that I will soon fall back in love with Denver theatre, but, for the moment, we're "taking a break."
It's not you, it's me. Really.
As for movies, Iron Man was great, in my opinion, Speed Racer was a lot of fun (no sequels this time though, please, Wachowski brothers) and Dan in Real Life was well-acted but predictable. I haven't mustered up the courage to see the latest Indiana Jones yet. I'm a big Harrison Ford fan, but I'm just not sure that this movie needed to be made.
So, today, dear readers, I am going to broach a subject that I normally eschew: politics. The DNC is coming to Denver in August, and there are some bloggers up in arms that they aren't invited because they have been critical of party leadership.
Now, I'm not a Democrat (or a Republican, for that matter), but I think I can see both sides of this.
On the one hand the DNC wants to throw a big mutual admiration, pat-each-other-on-the-back, ain't-we-just-grand, feel-good family shindig, and they'd just as soon not have the bickering cousins sitting at the head table. Well, it's their show. I guess they can invite whomever they want.
On the other hand, these bloggers show their loyalty to their party through their willingness to yell "BS!" from time to time, to keep everyone on track. They are just doing their part, and should probably be allowed to join the fiesta.
Honestly, though, I think that this country's inexplicable need to be an "either/or" when it comes to political affiliation is a great hindrance to democracy and efficiency.
Ideologically speaking, there are moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans who are nearer to one another than they are to the center of their own parties, not to mention the extremists. Yet, these two individuals of nearly identical minds will vote completely opposite of one another simply because they identify themselves as being part of one "club" versus another because of their upbringing or their geography. Plus, they're lazy.
"I don't have to know the platforms of every candidate on the ballot. I just need to know their party."
Democracy in action. Democracy inaction.
Add to this the fact that, once elected, the representatives of each side spend so much more time throwing mud (on-camera whenever possible) at the other team that not much really seems to get done. At this point, there are only two ways for government to be more fruitful under the current system:
The first way is for one side to dominate another in the elections and seize power. The major downside to this is that a significant portion of the population will feel highly under-represented, and we don't need another "Mason-Dixon Line" in this country.
The second way is through the "miracle" of bipartisanship. This is a big deal when this happens, it seems, because it always manages to get plenty of coverage in the press.
"Oh. look! One of the red guys is shaking hands with one of the blue guys! They're working together, isn't it amazing?"
(Do yourself a favor. Look into the etymology of "Congress" sometime.)
Am I saying that we need a third party? Yes, and a fifth, and a seventh. (Odd numbers tend to work out better when one reaches an impasse.)
It's time that we ask ourselves why am I in this club? If you know the answer and like the answer, then cool, be a DNC'er or a GOP'er, by all means. However, if you find yourself with doubt in your heart, embrace that doubt.
Take responsibility for your vote, a lot of people fought very hard that you may have it. Vote for people and ideas, not "colors" or "animals."
Do your representatives represent you? If not, then you've got nobody to blame but yourself.
Okay, I'm going to step off of the soapbox now.
It's a good thing, too, because you don't want me to get started on the electoral college . . .