(Via About Last Night.)
I love this exchange:
"Would it have anything to do with law in any way?"
The host John Charles Daly makes a ruling:
"No, I think that, while there may be some relationship, in some aspects of your work, with law, they would be incidental to our basic line of questioning."
Ugh. What an outrageous ruling from the host, John Daly. He's acting as though he's all erudite and urbane, making an elaborate technical ruling, and the "no" answer ends the questioner's turn. But the questioner worded his question carefully, saying "anything" and "in any way," so the ruling, relying on excluding the "incidental" and the concept of a "basic line of questioning" is thoroughly specious. I hate that kind of phony, show-offy, fake intelligence. Now, Wright, the "world famous architect," was also a world famous genius, and his 2-world answer was absolutely smart, correct, and funny.
Or do you miss that old-fashioned style of witty speech?