Oh, Colmes does that, of course (he is still a liberal); however, there are often times when even a liberal is on the show and I've seen Colmes get to the point of the matter and Colmes will explain why he disagrees with what the liberal guest is saying/doing. This most recently occurred with the anti-war crowd when they were on the program.
The only time I've seen Colmes lose it was when Michael Reagon was on the show a couple weeks ago....Hannity received a caller the next day on his radio program to complain about Colmes behavior the night before; Hannity placed a live call to Colmes to discuss that; Colmes was gracious to the caller, but defended himself, saying he doesn't think it's right, for either side, to turn the war into a political argument to favor a party, not while the troops are in harm's way.
I agree that he explains his position and points usually in the initial phase of his argument, but the technique I am referring to usually comes out quite quickly as the argument begins to go against him. I watched several nights in a row to see how he was agruing, this was the style I noted he had adopted. The problem is that I don't think Hannity is very good at logical rhetoric either. I notice tons of missed opportunities when he has someone under the spotlight. I wish they would replace Hannity with Ann Coulter, that would be a great show!