[aaronbrethorst]

I'm still not clear on what your original reply to me was supposed to mean, except that you seem to be making some unfounded assumptions about someone (or two people) you don't know.

[foldr]

I'm just going with what your post says. Your criteria, even making allowances for half-exaggeration, clearly rule out anyone who is poor or disadvantaged as a potential partner. And although you don't explicitly say that you regard yourself as rabidly liberal, it's reasonable to assume that you do given that you want to date someone who is. (But of course, you may be a conservative who wants to date a liberal, in which case, feel free to correct me.)

[TillE]

> even making allowances for half-exaggeration

You might want to loosen that allowance a little bit. I'm sure they meant "intelligent", not literally a professor.

[foldr]

I was going more with the "Ivy-eaducated" part, but sure, if none of that was meant at all literally, then my point doesn't apply.