If you check some of the international news wires, there are a lot of eyes on Obama's actions versus his rhetoric. The China accord was received very well abroad. But it would all be for naught if he then turns around and approves Keystone.

And yes, it is true that Keystone by itself isn't going to add much to the world's total carbon output. But it's also true that adding 830k barrels a day would increase the U.S.'s output by almost 10%. And it is also true that tar sands oil burns 17% dirtier. The point is that the rate of extraction is just as important (if not moreso) than the total output when it comes to the issue of global warming.

Ultimately, Keystone is largely a symbolic gesture. But when the end goal is whether we burn ourselves to death in 50 years or 500 years, then it's a massively important one.

For me, there's a lot to be disappointment when it comes to Obama, but vetoing Keystone isn't one of them.