Obama's resume is painfully thin. That's why all the focus is on charisma and platitudes. He went with Biden because anyone else would highlight Obama's lack of job experience....The media has been doing a full court press, almost 3 to 1, in super favorable coverage of him and Obama still can't close the deal.
There's plenty of substance on Obama's web site, should people choose to look at it. All you have to do is go there and read it. That the press chooses not to dwell on specifics is hardly his fault. Seek and ye shall find.
Biden was an obvious choice. One rap on Obama is that he's got no foreign policy experience. (Of course this is often true for people coming out of legislatures; they only job that gets you both executive and foreign policy experience is, well, the presidency, so all this "experience" talk is a bit of a crock. See Michael Kinsley's piece in Slate
for more on the experience issue and what McCain's Veep should indicate about it). Biden as more foreign policy experience than just about anyone else in the Senate, since he's been on the Foreign Relations Committee for umpteen years. It's really tough to argue that "Obama doesn't know his way around Washington" and then criticize him for picking a running mate who does. I think Biden was a great choice. If an instance of plagiarism almost 20 years ago can outweigh the rest of a person's positive attributes, then we truly get the government we deserve. I wouldn't vote against McCain simply because he walked out on his first wife.
As for press coverage, a July study
from George Mason University's Center for Media and Public Affairs said that since the end of the primaries, network news stories on Obama had been 72% negative compared to 43% negative for McCain. With weeks spent on Reverend Wright, Bittergate, and other non-policy matters, I don't see how Obama has goten a free ride at all, much less anything "super favorable." (Nor do I think how many homes McCain does or doesn't live in have anything to do with how he would act as president.)