Q6600 is superb value because it's in the process of being replaced.
Q6700 is good value and a better choice than the Q6600 if you're not planning to OC.
Q9300 I see no point in unless the q6's became unobtainable.
Q9450 is currently the cheapest entry into the 12Mb cache 45nm CPU's.
The closest to future proof you'll get is a PCI-E 2 mboard with DDR3 RAM, eSATA, etc.
Of course these things always cost a packet. Especially the RAM which doesn't appear to be used to its greatest potential yet.
I usually buy two CPU's to every mboard to maximise the life of the system. However last time around the short supply of the second CPU and high prices mean this time it'll be only 1 CPU and I'll put up with it being 'slow' later in its life.
Because of this I will be going for the Q9450 rather than the better value Q6600. I want the lower power use, faster basic CPU and extra cache. I may in future OC it and to achieve the same overall performance I suspect it'll be easier (and quieter) on air than a Q6600 (clearly only my suspicion).
DDR3. It's terrible value now but should be more attainable and cheaper then DDR2 in 5yrs. So it's either 2Gb DDR3 now and add more later or loads of DDR2 now knowing your system may not make the best use of the amount until the next release of Windows.
My next mboard is likely to be a ASUS P5-E variant. I also considered Abit but it didn't have the perculiar feature set I wanted.