Your statement: "What I want in a nominee is a conservative intellectual force that leads the court (and the legal system) to a more sane understanding of the proper role of the courts in our society."
They mean the same thing.
You went on to say: "As I've said before on other threads, I'd rather have a brilliant jurist who gives me 70% of the votes I want than a mediocrity who votes "correctly" all the time."
Although I have to take your word for your own position, I guarantee you that the first time some brilliant jurist casts one of those 30% votes, the caterwauling from the uber right would be just as loud as it has been these last few weeks.
You're, of course, right to question the honesty of my statement. Reviewing my recent posts, I have apparently vacillated between a 70% and an 80% "correct" vote requirement for my ideal Republican-nominated justice.