It usually takes a few days before a real verbal battle breaks out at the Television Critics Association tour. But sooner or later, a war of words will break out between the TV critics, including yours truly, who are in Los Angeles to preview the fall season and interview the talent.

Fox News nchor Chris Wallace threw the first punch. He took offense that Fox contributor Karl Rove had been the focus of numerous questions other than what is it like to work for the Fox Network. Call me silly, but if you ignore a subpoena from Congress, that's going to draw some attention.

Wallace had finally heard enough Tuesday and fired off "I think there is a double standard in the
questions that particularly Karl is being asked here. I don't understand. Maybe somebody can
explain to me why it is that if Congress and the White House are having a fight in executive power
that that should in any way constrain an independent news organization's decision as to who
it's going to have on its payroll and who it's going to talk to."

.Wallace always has shown a great grasp of the news. Could he really be stunned Rove was being grilled?

Wallace has the right to question the questions. What sparked the heated dialogue came when Wallace suggested that he question that if a conservative Congress that had subpoenaed liberal James
Carville, "whether you'd be asking CNN why they're trafficking with James Carville."

Oh Chris, you don't know this group.

The news anchor should have taken a hint from Rove. The political analyst dodged some questions with the greatest of ease. He faced others without a blink. The most nimble move came when he was asked if he had supported the hiring of "the head of a horse show association to be the head of FEMA?," Rove said the only way to know the answer would be to buy his book when it is released in 2009. The book will cost $29.95.

Rove was slightly more forthcoming about the subpoena.

"Actually, it is not between me and Congress. I have not asserted any personal privilege. This is between the White House and Congress. This is a longstanding battle over the principle of executive privilege
and the ability of a president to receive advice from senior advisers and for those senior advisers not to be
at the beck and call of Congress for testimony. I have asserted no privilege. In fact, in five
separate letters to the House Judiciary Committee, my lawyer has offered for me to go up and visit
with members of Congress, visit with the staff, or respond to written questions without foreclosing
any future action by Congress about the so-called Don Siegelman political prosecution. We've said
to them, "Look, you don't have to promise to do anything, but if you want to find out what I know
and what my knowledge of this is, we'd be happy to come up in a setting that does not -- that
respects the form of executive privilege and gives you the information you need, but doesn't violate
the principle of a president having the right to have senior aides not at the beck and call of
Congress for testimony," Rove said.

The questions continued. Rove said he doesn't expect another Great Depression. It was his honor to work with broadcaster Tony Snow, who recently died after a battle with cancer. And, to a question of whether he thinks Barack Obama is "anti-American?", Rove said, "I don't believe he's anti-American. I do believe he has a liberal perspective on things that I don't share and I think a lot of Americans don't share, clearly, but anti-American, no.

"I do think this, though. I've said this on air, not on the news program, but on the commentary, I do think he made a mistake when he went out and said that, after 9/11, he took the American flag lapel pin off because he thought it had become a matter of true patriotism consisted of speaking out on the
issue, not wearing a flag lapel pin. You can wear a flag lapel pin and be a true patriot, and you can speak out on the issues and not wear a flag lapel pin and be a true patriot. I think it went one step too far to say that wearing a flag lapel pin was not true patriotism. For a lot of people it is true patriotism. And
that kind of judgmental comment, I thought, was inappropriate. I don't suggest it's un-American,
but it was questioning, inherently, the patriotism of people who said, "You know what, I'm going to
put a flag on my lapel or on my sleeve or on my uniform, I'm going to do so because it's a
patriotic demonstration."

In the end, Rove didn't need Wallace's help in dealing with the TV critics. Bring on Carville.