How are any of those three deeds sufficient to even be nominated or seriously considered? This is not an award for politicians from the United States, it is one for the world. And if nuclear non-proliferation is a big reason, shouldn't Lugar also be mentioned in the peace prize? As far as words on the campaign trail, they ARE just words. The countries that Obama thinks we need improved relations with the most - Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea - have not yet changed their tune on anything. If anything, our relations with Iran have gotten worse recently, due to the disputed elections and nuclear concerns. Venezuela has continued with Chavez being Chavez. North Korea is also the same as always.
For you to even suggest that changing the death penalty in one state, some _bi-partisan_ (not just Obama) legislation, and words and rhetoric (Hope and Change!) are enough to even get you nominated for the piece prize is ridiculous, much less winning it. Actions speak louder than words, and his actions as of yet have not warranted this treatment.
I think the problem that most people have is that he was nominated because he became President, and not because of what he has actually done to improve peace around the world.