Please don't take this wrong. But I think you're setting yourself up for another brawl over the next nominee. Follow me here before you throw something at me.
I think ideologically the president agrees with you. Overturn Roe, property rights, quotas, etc. But he has a different view of the role of the president. He's never taken an ideological posture, except when he steps into campaign mode. As PRESIDENT, he focuses on the constitutional role of the president. He views the court the same way. Note his total emphasis on "originalist" philosophy and a judge who won't legislate from the bench. I think Bush believes a justice who is grounded in the constitution WILL overturn Roe...but on constituional grounds, NOT idealogical grounds. Having watched him carefully, he believes a true LEGAL conservative will automatically benefit the conservative POLITICAL agenda. But he's not going to put the political agenda up front...it's not in keeping with his view of the presidency.
Conservatives were outraged when Schumer declared that Dems would consider "ideology" on judicial nominees. We said religious beliefs shouldn't be a test. We believe a nominee shouldn't be required to state how he/she will decide on issues likely to come before the court.
Our side violated every one of those supposed principles in this fight. It weakens us in future battles. That's why I think Bush will once again (like Roberts and Miers) focus on the LEGAL philosophy of the nominee. But this time, he'll pick a stronger, better known person...I think McConnel or Luttig, or maybe even Ted Olsen.
Yes, it will turn into an "ideological" battle. But you will only hear Bush address the legal considerations.