Rep. Tim Walz will be the new co-chair of the National Guard and Reserve Components Caucus at the start of the new Congress in January. Walz, the highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the House, will share the post with Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter of California. Walz will join several other members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation who also serve as chairs of caucuses in the House.

In a press release announcing Walz’ new post, Hunter said, “I am honored to serve as co-chair of the Guard and Reserve Caucus alongside Tim, who served our country in the National Guard and is also one of the strongest advocates in Congress for our servicemen and women. Tim’s insight and experience make him a perfect fit to help lead the caucus and I look forward to working with him on the issues that matter most to the Guard and Reserve, and its families.”

Walz has the backing of an array of groups in his new post including the National Guard Association of the United States, the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, the Marine Corps Reserve Association, the Association of the US Navy, the Retired Enlisted Association, the Reserve Officers Association and the Reserve Enlisted Association.

Walz isn’t alone among state delegates for serving as chair of a caucus. Rep. Michele Bachmann founded and chairs the House Tea Party Caucus; Rep Erik Paulsen chairs the Med Tech Caucus; and Rep. Keith Ellison is the new co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus.

And so it was that the candidates departed the cornfields of Iowa for the Granite State, where they would again go into small cafes and blueberry festivals.  They’ll go to the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee and the convenience stores of Nashua, and then they will stand for election in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation presidential primary, if one doesn’t count the Iowa or Wyoming caucuses.  And when the votes are tallied, one thing will be absolutely clear: this is no way to pick a president.

There is nothing wrong with New Hampshire, of course, nor with Iowa, nor Wyoming or South Carolina or any of the other states that hold primaries or caucuses before Super Duper Tuesday in February.  But the system that took us to Iowa last Thursday and to New Hampshire this Tuesday is, to put it nicely, insane.  On the Democratic side, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., appears poised to win in New Hampshire, and thus to have essentially wrapped up the Democratic nomination for the presidency.  Never mind that 48 states and the District of Columbia have yet to weigh in on the matter; any pundit will tell you that momentum is obviously on the side of Obama and clearly against Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who is obviously in second place nationally now.  Of course, Clinton looks ready to come in second after coming in third in Iowa, which will likely be the opposite of former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., who came in second in Iowa and will come in third in New Hampshire.  But everyone knows that Edwards is certainly out of the running, while Clinton can at least soldier on a bit more.And the Democratic field looks to be a bastion of sanity compared with what’s going on in the Republican Party.  At least Obama will have won two states; he’ll be the clear front-runner.  For the Republicans, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee won Iowa, but is definitely not the leader, or so we’re told.  Neither is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who came in second in Iowa and won the Wyoming caucuses on Saturday — except we don’t count the Wyoming caucuses, because traditionally New Hampshire comes after Iowa, so they’re being studiously ignored.

No, the current leader among the Republicans is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who came in fourth in Iowa behind former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., and tied for fourth in Wyoming with no delegates, behind Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. , who got one delegate. (Then again, nobody takes Hunter seriously, so best to ignore him.) Now McCain looks like he might win in New Hampshire, so he’ll be in the driver’s seat, at least until we hit the next set of caucuses.

If you’re getting the sense that our system of selecting presidential nominees doesn’t have much to do with actual election results, you’re right. One can make the case that Obama is rising in the Democratic field because he’s running a great campaign that connects with new voters, or one can make the case that he’s rising because Clinton came in third in Iowa and subsequently faced a barrage of negative press.  One can make the case that McCain’s fourth-place showing in Iowa doesn’t matter because he didn’t run hard there, and therefore a win in New Hampshire is a win in his first major test.  One can also make the case that a national winner should be competitive nationally.

And therein lies the problem: none of this has anything to do with who’s winning more votes or delegates, and everything to do with pundits and journalists reading tea leaves and telling the masses what it all means.  Should Obama win New Hampshire, as appears likely, the press will dutifully report that he’s now a prohibitive favorite for the nomination.  And that will draw voters to him.  Should McCain win New Hampshire, as appears probable, the press will report on the McCain resurgence.  And that will draw voters to him.

Indeed, the story the press tells becomes the story of the nomination.  Romney’s one first and two seconds will be viewed as a failure, while McCain’s one first and two fourths will be viewed as success, because that’s how the narrative goes.  And Romney will suffer because of it, while McCain rises.

This is no way to select a president.  Yes, the images of Huckabee or Edwards eating at a diner in Laconia are swell, but they’re not particularly useful.  No, it’s time for us to start running a presidential primary based on actual voter preference, rather than media narrative.

It wouldn’t have to be hard.  Divide the country up into five groups of states, starting with the 10 smallest, then next-10 smallest, and so forth.  Run 10-state primaries every other week from the first Tuesday of February through the first Tuesday of April.  If you want, put Iowa and New Hampshire in the first group for old-time’s sake.  Craft a federal law that sets basic criteria for the primary: the value of each state in delegates, the means of apportioning delegates.  Give the parties some input, but make this a federally operated election — meaning it’s time to eliminate caucuses, and replace them with primaries.

Some will cry foul.  Are we not tampering with the state-by-state process our Founding Fathers envisioned?  In a word, no.  The Founding Fathers figured that members of a party would pick a standard-bearer, and didn’t really worry about how that happened.  That meant that until the middle of the 20th century, those decisions were made in proverbial smoke-filled rooms, with citizens cut off from the process.  Our current system evolved out of the bad old days, a quasi-functional procedure that gave some of the power to the people, but not, frankly, very much.  Iowa is the first caucus in the nation because it’s the first caucus in the nation; ditto New Hampshire and its claim to being the first primary.  Neither state was selected because it was particularly representative or their populations particularly politically astute; they just got there first, and now hold on to their positions by vowing to penalize any presidential candidate who doesn’t pledge fealty to those states.  And the candidates gladly do so, because as Romney can tell you, Iowa and New Hampshire matter more than other states because that’s what everyone says.

It doesn’t matter how we divide up the states and structure a better system.  Divide them by region, draw lots, pick based on literacy rates or ratings for “According to Jim.”  Use instant runoff voting or allow a plurality to decide.  But divide up the states, and set up a true and fair primary system that recognizes and prioritizes votes instead of the narrative.  Because the presidency is too important a position to select in a sloppy, half-assed manner.  And we shouldn’t let another cycle go by without fixing the system.

“I want to be the president to appoint the justice that is the final vote we need to overturn Roe v. Wade and end this night of wrong,” said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., expressing a deep antipathy toward abortion that was shared by everyone on stage and many in the crowd.

“Life begins at conception,” echoed Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas.  Paul called on other candidates to support his “Sanctity of Life Act,” that which would strip federal courts of the right to review lawsuits related to reproductive health.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., pledged to appoint only anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court.  “If a judicial candidate can look at a sonogram of an unborn child and not see evidence of a valuable human life, I will not appoint him to the bench,” he said.

Read moreRep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., agreed with Hunter, saying, “All of us would appoint judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade.”  He said when it came to appointing judges and justices, “There will be a litmus test.”

Businessman John Cox said that, “This issue tears this country apart, and it shouldn’t.”  He said he was staunchly against abortion and called for judges to “only interpret the law.”

Ambassador Alan Keyes, who ran unsuccessfully for Senate against Barack Obama in 2004, said he would “issue an executive order…to protect life in the womb.”  And he called on Republicans to support a right-to-life amendment to the Constitution, saying, “It’s simple, it’s clear, it must be done.”

Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas took a shot at the candidate who did not attend, saying, “It’s obvious that all of us on this stage are pro-life. I also think it’s obvious why there are four empty podiums here tonight.”

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson all declined to attend the debate.

Candidates expressed general opposition to family planning programs.  In a “lighning “lightning round” of questions, all candidates said they would defund Planned Parenthood and would allow federal funding to go only to organizations that “neither perform nor promote abortion.”  All candidates also expressed opposition to universal health care and supported a ban on federal funding of school programs that teach that homosexuality is normal. 

Candidates also were unanimous in their support of expanding abstinence-based education funding, and all expressed opposition to treaties, such as the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, that “could be used to support abortion as a human right.”

Giuliani: F.  He sounded good at times, but if I was a pro-life Republican, I’d be pretty disgusted by him right now.  His abortion policy is not pro-choice–it’s completely incoherent.  And if anything, he managed to muddy the waters more.

McCain: C-minus.  Through much of the debate he seemed lost.  He sounds old, and he sounds worn out.

Romney: B.  Generally sounded and looked the most superficially presidential.

Brownback: C-plus.  Certainly didn’t inspire enough confidence to vault to the upper tier.

Tancredo: B.  Oh, he sounded crazy, but he’s really just running for the elimination of Mexicans, and he did a good job of pounding that theme.

Hunter: B.  Looks oddly like a young Chris Dodd; I think his pounding on protectionism could be a good tactic.  But he also still has no chance.

Gilmore: My notes say Jim Gilmore participated in this debate.  I can neither confirm nor deny that, as I have no recollection of his participation.

Huckabee: B-plus.  Probably the most impressive of the second tier candidates.

Tommy Thompson: F.  I honestly still don’t know what Thompson thinks he’s doing, unless he’s hoping to be confused with Fred Thompson by voters.

Paul: B.  Had some good moments, and should lock up 100% of American libertarians.  Unfortunately, that means he has 1% of the vote locked up solidly, and the other 99% of the vote pretty freaked out by him.

Chris Matthews: B-minus.  Questions were tough, but actual questions.  Didn’t have the “random baseless assertion” section that Brian Williams decided to go with last week.  Still Chris Matthews, so still periodically so annoying as to make you want to jump off a cliff, but for Chris Matthews, pretty good.

Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich: A.  Not showing up won’t hurt them.  Indeed, not showing up may be their best strategy for some time.

George W. Bush: F.  Look, the GOP field can’t get too down on the Commander Guy because hey, he’s the Commander Guy.  John Hinderaker would plotz.  But they were as hard on him as they could be.  Clearly, the Republicans know that this is a bad period for them.

And finally, the last word goes to Fred Thompson, who tells Minnesota Monitor, “By God, if you call me Harry once more, you’ll be busting counterfeiters in Alaska!”

See you next time!

Brownback: No!

Mike Huckabee, what mistakes has the Bush administration made that you won’t repeat?

Huckabee: Well, I won’t let jobs move overseas–I’ll tell you that!

Tom Tancredo, yes or no, will you work to protect women’s rights?

Tancredo: I will work to protect women’s rights, unless those rights include abortion.

Tommy Thompson, do you know how many Americans have been killed and injured?

Tommy Thompson: Not exactly.  But I’m at least in the ballpark.

Fred Thompson, do you have a followup?

Fred Thompson (from “Days of Thunder”): You ever heard of a “Japanese Inspection?” Japanese Inpsection, you see, when the Japs take in a load of lettuce they’re not sure they wanna let in the country, why they’ll just let it sit there on the dock ’til they get good and ready to look at, But then of course, it’s all gone rotten… ain’t nothing left to inspect. You see, lettuce is a perishable item… like you two monkeys. You trade paint one more time, you so much as touch, I’m gonna Black Flag the two of you, and tear apart your racecars for three-hundred laps. Then, if you pass inspection and you put your cars back together, I might let you back into the race. Now, just to show there’s no hard feelings we’re all gonna go to dinner together.

So, everyone, should we have a national ID card?

Romney: Why not?

Brownback: Actually, no, not really.  Secure the border.  We have the Social Security number.  Isn’t that enough?

Paul: Absolutely opposed.  This is the opposite of what a free society is about.  The government’s job is to protect the privacy of people?

Tancredo: We don’t need an ID card, we need a verifiable tax ID number.

Matthews: Would you pardon Scooter Libby?

Romney: Not until the judicial process is complete, but boy, was it bad for Pat Fitzgerald to prosecute him.  And national IDs for aliens only!

Brownback: Hey, Bush can do whatever he wants to do.  No law was violated!  I mean, he was only convicted of perjury!

Gilmore: ID cards for brown people only.  Pardon Libby only if you can make the case for impeachment.

Tom Tancredo: Pardon him, and pardon those border guards who shot someone in cold blood.

Paul: Guess what?  Scooter was guilty, guilty, guilty, and so was the rest of the Bush administration.  And you can suck it.

Teri Schiavo–family decide, or Congress?

Romney: Why do you ask such terrible questions.

Brownback: I believe the family should decide, and by “family” I mean “not her husband.”

McCain: Okay, not really.

Giuliani: Can you tell me why we have courts again?

Matthews: Good for America to have Bill Clinton back in the White House?

Romney: No, he’s icky.

Brownback: It would be bad because Hillary is a Democrat, not because she’s a Clinton.

Everyone else: Uh, have we mentioned that we’re Republicans?  And we’re running against Hillary Clinton?  Yeah, we’re not big Clinton fans.

Every president was elected to correct the problems of his predecessor.  How do you fix the mess Bush created?

Romney: I believe George W. Bush is teh aw3sum.  And where I disagree with him, it’s only because he hasn’t gone far enough.

McCain: I wouldn’t have mismanaged the war.  I would have managed it well!  By doing…uh…different things.  Oh, and actually I came up with the surge.  So…nothing.

Gilmore: We need more government intervention in people’s private lives.

Huckabee: States’ rights yes!

Hunter: We need to rebuild our industrial base, and I believe in massive protectionism.

Brownback: Partition Iraq.

Tancredo: No Child Left Behind and the Prescription Drug Bill.  (Bet you thought I’d say immigration, didn’t ya?)

Tommy Thompson: I’d boldly not be elected President.

Giuliani: 9/11.  9/11.  9/11.  9/11.  9/11.  9/11.  9/11.  And in conclusion, 9/11.

Paul: Robert Taft was a great man.

Hunter: Brown people are coming into America to eat our brains!

John McCain, do you believe in evolution?

McCain: (After a long pause)  Yes.

(There were three hands raised saying they don’t.  I believe Brownback was one.)

Mitt Romney, do you like families?

Romney: Yes.

Rudy Giuliani, do you know the difference between Sunnis and Shi’a?

Giuliani: Yes, I do.  (And he actually does.)

Jim Gilmore, why do the other candidates suck?

Gilmore: Well, they just do.

Romney: Oh, but I do!  I just don’t highlight it anymore because it’s not politically expedient.

VandeHei: John McCain, just admit you’ve flip-flopped on the Bush tax cuts.

McCain: It’s spending that’s the problem.  It wasn’t a problem in 2001, by cracky.  Flip-flopping?  Impossible?

Matthews: Tax cuts, what do you like?

Romney: Zero taxes on capital gains for “middle class”

Brownback: I have some crazy minimum tax policy.

Gilmore: I don’t have any, so I’ll mention a car tax that I cut when I was Governor of Virginia.  Oh–wait–I just remembered the AMT!

Huckabee: Eliminate the IRS!  Restructure the system!  A flat tax that is a fair tax!

Hunter: Eliminate manufacturing taxes. 

Tommy Thompson: I’m excited to answer this, because I vetoed a whole buncha stuff in Wisconsin!  Oh, and in answer to your question, AMT.

McCain: Line item veto.  AMT.  Also, tax credit for health insurance.

Paul: Eliminate the entire income tax, the inflation tax, and any other tax.  Shutter the government.  Who needs a government, anyhow?  Also, bring back the gold standard

Giuliani: Death tax!  Death tax!  That could affect up to three American billionaires in 2011!

Hunter: Repeal the sixteenth amendment.  Cut funding to entitlement programs.

VandeHei: You’ve said you’ll appoint a Democrat if elected.  Anyone other than Joe Lieberman?

McCain: Nobody specific other than Lieberman, but I’ll go find random people you’ve never heard of, and for all you know they might be Democrats.  Also, Joe Lieberman.

McCain: A shot at Giuliani?  No!  That was a shot at…uh…”special interests.”  And we lost in 2006 because we spent too much money.  And your crazy light system confuses and befuddles me.

How do we solve the problem?

McCain: Line item veto, pork barrel, yada yada yada.

Mike Huckabee, what’s the grade on the Bush administration’s conduct in Iraq?

Huckabee: I don’t want to give him an F, so I’ll tapdance.

Mitt Romney, pro-life?

Romney: Yeah, I want to make sure that people can occupy abortion clinics and force women to read misleading information about abortion.

Rudy, can you possibly square the circle on abortion?

Giuliani: I hate abortion, but think a woman has a right to choose, which I want to limit, but I don’t really want to limit it, but I do, but I don’t.

Tommy Thompson, is racism a problem?  How does the President solve it?

Thompson: I won’t answer the first half of the question, because the answer is obviously yes, and that doesn’t help me in the South.

Tom Tancredo, if not you for President, who?

Tancredo: We’re all nice guys, but I’m the only one worth voting for.  Have I mentioned that I hate brown people?  I do.  I hate them a lot. 

McCain: I actually don’t hate brown people that much.  They’re okay with me.

Duncan Hunter, have you seen An Inconvenient Truth?

Hunter: No, but you know, Gore’s not totally crazy, and maybe we could actually try to get energy independent, for security if for no other reason.

Ron Paul, have you ever made a sane decision?

Paul: I’m a doctor.  Have I mentioned that?  Yes, I’m a doctor.  So I can make decisions.  By the way, no war in Iraq.

Jim Gilmore, a question.

Jim Gilmore: I’ve addressed things about that question.  9/11.

Matthews: Nancy Reagan is in favor of embryonic stem-cell research.

Romney: I’m going to say I’m in favor of it, but I’m not really in favor of it, because I’m actually opposed for embryonic stem-cell research, I’m for altered nuclear transfer.

Brownback: Adult stem cells, si, embryos, no!

Tommy Thompson: Yes?  No?  What are these words you speak of?

McCain: You know, if embryos aren’t going to be used, then what the heck are we arguing about?  Yes.

Paul: We should eliminate the government.

Giuliani: Sure, because I’m pro-choice.  Except when I’m pro-life.  And I like Norm Coleman’s bill. 

Everyone else: Nancy Reagan can eat it.

Hunter: Build a big fence on the Mexican border!  That will end all crime!

Jim Gilmore, is Karl Rove your friend?

Gilmore: Hey, it’s Bush that sucks, not Rove.  Wait–that’s not what I meant.  And Rove is not important, and I resent the implication that the fact that I like Karl Rove and want to bear his children has become an issue.

Tancredo: Karl Rove is too fond of brown people.

Rudy, is it good that there are a bunch of crazy Christians in your party?

Giuliani: Yeah, sure, let me ignore that question and say that I can win in New York City, and if I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere.

Matthews: Tommy Thompson, I don’t care enough to ask a question.

Tommy Thompson: I don’t care enough to formulate a coherent answer.

Sam Brownback, there are a bunch of criminals in your party?

Brownback: There are Democrat members who are bad too.  Okay, there’s just one.  But bad people should go to jail.  And how do we build a stronger culture?  Have you ever read a book called The Handmaid’s Tale?

Various answers, including “Awesome,” “Totally awesome,” “More awesome than awesome,” and “Pretty f—ing awesome.”

Tommy Thompson, gay rights, pro or con?

Thompson: Con.

Mitt Romney’s Mormonism–horrible?

Everyone: No!  Of course not!

Romney: Everyone’s wonderful as long as they belong to a church.

Brownback: Yeah!  Atheists suck, everyone else is awesome!  Mostly the Christians!

Everyone but Giuliani: Yep!

Guliani: Pass.

Mitt Romney, do you want to just admit you’re a flip-flopper?

Mitt Romney: Yes, I’m a flip-flopper, and right now I’m pro-life, and I will stay pro-life so long as it is politically expedient for me to do so.

Sam Brownback, could you support a pro-choice candidate?

Brownback: Yeah, I guess so.  But not really.

Rudy, you were in favor of killing funds for bad art, but you’re for taxpayer funds for abortion.

Giuliani: No, I’m not.

Matthews: Yes you are.

Giuliani: No, I’m not.

Matthews: Yes you are.

Giuliani:  All right, I guess I am.  But I am not.

McCain, you want to ramble incoherently for a while?

McCain:  We can’t bust heads like we used to, but we have our ways. One trick is to tell ‘em stories that don’t go anywhere — like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ‘em. ‘Give me five bees for a quarter,’ you’d say.

Now where were we? Oh yeah — the important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones…

Giuliani: Well, I wouldn’t say “hated.”

Mitt Romney, what do you dislike most about America?

Romney: Absolutely nothing!  We live in a perfect society, and none can gaze upon us without being blinded!

Mike Huckabee, what about global warming?

Huckabee: I’m not saying it’s man-made, but it’s man-made.  We have to be good stewards of the Earth.

Tom Tancredo, how do we solve the problem of the shortage of organs for transplant?

Tancredo: No.  And no jokes about harvesting them from immigrants.  And I hate cloning.

Duncan Hunter, I have a question?

Hunter: I’m going to ignore you and talk about Iran.

Ron Paul, eliminate the government?

Paul: Yes.

7:21–Oh, goody, questions from the people.

John McCain, you totally disagree with Tom Tancredo on immigration.  So would you make him your head of INS?

McCain: No, and let me talk about bin Laden.

Matthews: Should we make it legal for Arnold to run for president?

Several: no. 

Huckabee: After I win, I’ll be happy to make the change.

McCain: If he endorses me, yes.

McCain: Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.  Which is a cultured society. That needs to be bombed.

Matthews: So what makes you kill ‘em?  Nukes?  Chemical weapons? Not Without My Daughter?

McCain: Well, I mean, if they got nukes, we’d have to nuke ‘em to keep ‘em from nuking us.  Hopefully, we won’t have to destroy the country to save it.

Matthews: Tom Tancredo, Israel wants to bomb Iran.  Are you in or out?

Tancredo: In!

Matthews: Rudy?

Giuliani: Well…that’s a bit crazy.  But remember, the Iranians were so scared of Reagan they just gave up the hostages immediately!  Have I mentioned that I’m like Reagan?

Matthews: Jim Gilmore, should we go after bin Laden?

Gilmore: Yeah, but let me talk about a lot of other tangentially related stuff.

Matthews: Multiple choice Mitt?

Romney: It’s very important we get bin Laden.  But it isn’t really all that important.

Giuliani: Security!  Safety!  Optimism!  And Lebensraum!  We have great health care that is flawed and needs to be fixed.  Also, don’t retreat in the face of terrorism!

Matthews: So, John McCain, how do we win in Iraq?

McCain: New general, new strategy, strategy can succeed.  Says if we can bring about security, we can win in Iraq.  (But can’t we walk freely in the streets?)  And surrender bad!  Victory good!  Oh, sure, the war’s been mismanaged.  But new strategy, and new general.  Win.

Tommy Thompson: Uh, referendum?  Also, I look like I’ve taken a 2×4 to my head.

Hunter: Says some stuff.  I give him points for not mentioning that his son is in Iraq right now.

VandeHei: So Mitt Romney, people want out of Iraq.  Why can’t we leave?

Romney: Strength! Why, if you let the people have a voice, then they make decisions!  We need to support strength and stability.  And strength.

Matthews: Sam Brownback, Muslims hate us.  For God’s sake, why can’t any of you just admit this is a debacle?

Brownback: Hey, some Muslims like us!  And those that don’t, we’ll marginalize until they hate us more.

Matthews: Can we win the war without getting Muslims to like us?

Brownback: No, not really.  But that doesn’t mean we can’t attack some brown people.

VandeHei: Mike Huckabee, would you have fired Rummy?

Huckabee: Yes.  That’s the President’s call, and he really screwed up.  He should’ve listened to the soldiers.  (But I thought Bush was the Commander Guy?)  Iraq’s a disaster, we never should have invaded, but it will be worse if we leave.

Matthews: Shakeup in the Bush administration: good or bad?

Gilmore: Admit it, until the chyron popped up, you didn’t have a clue in the world who I was.

It’s almost embarassing.  At least in 2000, they had Liddy for a fig leaf.

Olbermann noted how there was an air of regalness to the procession.  Well, yes–but America was founded on a rejection of the monarchy. 

And Pat Buchanan is bemoaning the influence of the neocons on the GOP.  And he’s backing Ron Paul.

Tonight should be interesting.

While we wait for something to actually happen, if you want more info, here’s our preview for tonight.  And stay tuned between 7 and 8:30 for our liveblog.

VandeHei: Ron Paul, you actually voted against the war.  Why are these guys idiots?

Paul: Yeah, and 70% of Americans hate it.  I’m in favor of isolationism.  That’s pro-America–pulling out of the world.

Republican candidates for the presidency will gather Thursday night at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, Calif., for their first nationally televised debate.  The debate, which will be carried on MSNBC and liveblogged here at Minnesota Monitor starting at 7 p.m., will feature 10 Republicans vying to succeed George W. Bush. Here’s a quick look at the Republican candidates and the state of their campaigns today:

First, conspicuous by his absence will be Fred Thompson, a former U.S. senator from Tennessee.  Thompson has not yet announced his candidacy and was not invited to the debate.  Despite that, Thompson is currently second in the Rasmussen Reports poll, with 14 percent support.  Newt Gingrich, a former U.S. representative from Georgia, will not be attending the debate for the same reason. Gingrich polls fifth with 8 percent support.

The current front-runner for the GOP nomination is Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City. Giuliani has 30 percent support in the Rasmussen poll but has been under attack from social conservatives critical of statements he has made in support of government-funded abortion for the poor, as well as his generally liberal views on gay rights. Giuliani has strong support in national polls, though, and has thus far raised more than $16 million dollars for his campaign.

Another top-tier GOP candidate is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.   McCain, tied with Fred Thompson for second at 14 percent in the Rasmussen poll, has struggled to get his campaign on track and has had a string of recent gaffes – from his claim that westerners could stroll the streets of Baghdad unmolested to his recent singing of “Bomb Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran” at a campaign event.  McCain has raised the third-most funds of GOP contenders, however, with $13 million thus far.

The top fund-raiser thus far has been Mitt Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts. Romney raised more than $23 million so far.  He’s still polling fourth among GOP candidates, though, with 11 percent of the vote.  His Mormon faith is believed to be a potential liability for his need to secure the GOP’s evangelical base, as is his perceived “flip-flopping” on issues.

None of the other Republicans running for president are polling in double digits, and of the remaining group, only two have raised more than a million dollars.  Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., is running as a staunch conservative with a deep commitment to the GOP’s social base.  He has been struggling to overcome doubts about his viability in a general election.  Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., is running an issue-oriented campaign supporting strong curbs on immigration and a harsh crackdown on illegal immigrants.

Other GOP candidates attending tonight’s debate will be Jim Gilmore, a former Republication National Committee chairman from Virginia, whose campaign has yet to catch fire; Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who is perhaps best known for losing more than 100 pounds; Staunch conservative bomb-thrower Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, who is to the GOP field what Dennis Kucinich is to the Democratic one; Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, the darling of the libertarians, who should be interesting if for no other reason that he’ll be the lone opponent of the Iraq war on stage; and Tommy Thompson, a former governor of Wisconsin who has had to weather a controversy over insensitive and possibly anti-Semitic comments he made at a campaign event.

Minnesota Monitor’s liveblog of tonight’s event will run from the 7 p.m. start through the duration of the debate, plus post-debate coverage on how top-tier candidates performed.  Be sure to check back this evening for further coverage.