Posting some cut-and-paste, because this certainly applies...
-----
Consider the 30 year cycle; it goes 10 years of conservative strength, 10 years of liberal spending of that strength (ie wasting of peace dividends), and then another 10 years of suffering under liberal socialism until people snap and say enough is enough, then re-elect conservatives.
This pattern fits perfectly going all the way back to the 1880s, at least. In keeping with it, this decade is essentially a version of the 1970s. We may have yet to elect a "President Carter" and collapse for 4 years before a decade of true conservatism takes hold. (Bush resembles Nixon in some respects, and I mean that as nothing but a positive thing.)
It's a strange factor to consider Bush as a moderate (somewhat debatable), as that could either blunt the strength of a reactionary movement against liberalism (Carter didn't just suck, he sucked ROYALLY), or perhaps it could actually enhance republican policy, with the greatest danger being our own tendency to become moderates and even 'liberal republicans' as we gain power.
-----
[(Carter didn't just suck, he sucked ROYALLY)]
This is very true, but contrary to popular opinion, he didn't suck because he was an incompetent boob, he sucked because he (along with his Democratic friends who controlled Congress) skillfully implemented sweeping policies of Euro-socialism on our country. The result was a wrecked economy and societal problems that caused a national "malaise".