Won't be voting in a fixed primary

Since I'm registered in Pennsylvania as an independent and it's a closed primary, there's no way for me to vote for a candidate prior to the general election. This is unfortunate, as this primary is actually important, but I prefer to remain free from party interests despite my support of one candidate.
In some ways I'm valuing my independence more because of the system the Democrats have set up for how candidates are elected in the primaries. Joshua Spivak, a public relations executive and attorney that frequently writes about election issues wrote a good history of how the current delegate system was put in place in 1982.
According to Spivak it was set up so the Democratic party could control who the nominee would be. There are delegates, who are committed to voting for the nominee elected by citizens in his or her area of the state, and then there are super delegates who are beholden to political favors. For example, although PA Gov. Ed Rendell said he endorsed Hillary Clinton for her political platform, he owes the Clintons because they helped him become chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 2000 and because Hillary endorsed him for governor.
In every election since 1982, the clear candidate came out early, so the use of super delegates, who are basically influential party members (This blog has a list of super delegates; they are pretty much all members of congress, members of the DNC or governors), never came into play. But now that the election is tight, these super delegates will probably decide who will be the Democrats' nominee for president.
You could say I wouldn't be talking about this if the system were favoring Obama at this point, but I have decided to remain an independent, rather than registering as a Democrat to vote. I realize that choosing not to vote is a bit of a cop out, that voting is a way of expressing political beliefs and simply not voting is an easy way of not fulfilling the duties of a citizen. In this case, however it's different.
I've chosen to not be affiliated with a party and so I do not have the right to go back on that decision just because I want a piece of the action when it's convenient. I disagree with the electoral college, but I'm still going to vote because this is the system in America, however imperfect it may be. I willingly opted out of the primaries to become an independent, and so I'm stuck with the decision. I guess this is why I'm an independent in the first place. Politicians serve only themselves and perpetuate the a corrupt system.
Regardless, the whole system of powerful party members choosing the candidate (while at the same time holding public elections) reeks of the back room, back slapping and cigar smoking that permeated the Democratic party in its hey day of Mayor Daley's political machine. Frankly, the Democratic party is un-democratic.
In fact, I support Obama, but he's a politician just like everyone else. After all, he's a super delegate just like Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. They should be able to vote for themselves in the polling stations, just like everyone else, but having an extra vote to swing the election takes away their accountability to a democratic system.
One high ranking member of the DNC, Donna Brazile, said she would resign from her post if the super delegates overturned the will of voters. Since this is the system in place now, there's nothing we can do about it until after the elections, at which time it should be revised. But for now, I suppose I believe that any super delegate that committed to a candidate prior to the primary should be able to back that person. Anyone else who waited to see the outcome of voters should match the votes of people in their states.