What exactly are you trying to say here Charlie? That the President of the company may not present his case, or that it is somehow inappropriate on the basis of his wardrobe? That is what I am inferring from this very weak commentary.

How about using children, First Nations elders, and the "grandfatherly" Mr Suzuki in an effort to tug at heartstrings? Or, maybe they present as a reflection of their convictions, no matter how they are dressed? Should Mr Corrigan change his outfit too? Who is to say that he is not employing exactly the same strategy? How about if those in favour begin to question the veracity of those opposed based on their appearance? Or better yet, suggest that their opinions are less valid on the basis of what they are wearing?

Grasping at straws much?

It is hard to know what this elderly man with his speaking points is up to - last year he told Surrey (the fastest growing city with new population coming in every month) - that he would put his pipeline in Surrey and offered the City of Surrey double in property taxes. And now Delta is hearing that he wants to run a railway line down to Roberts Bank - and to ship it out of there with new terminals as well.

Willingness to respond to public concerns should also mean witnessing these same friendly grandfathers pick up a shovel and clean up the damage caused by their oil corporations. Reality is that inevitably, big oil execs shed all accountability at that point and vanish into thin air, letting their talking-heads take over. So much for 'leaving the environment as healthy as they found it'.

In other news, Protesters today festooned themselves in Gore-Tex, Fleece and Cowichan Sweaters in an effort to bolster their "enviro" credentials. It is suggested they are not dressed this way not as a matter of comfort or style befitting people of their demographic, rather to counter the blatant use of the "grandfatherly" image presented by Kinder Morgan CEO Mr Anderson.

His PR strategy is weak. Unless the dude is Santa Claus, a fat man sitting in a chair doesn't inspire feelings of warmth and community. As a viewer, the setup screams "inactivity" and "indifference" and those sentiments translate to the company as a whole.

Mooha: Are you merely mocking the messenger and thus avoiding the real issue?

After this present and future environmental pipeline disaster has been forced through leaving massive debt loaded on future generations yet to be born, it will be discovered that there won't be a market for this bitumen sludge.

China will be getting most of their refined oil and LNG from Russian Siberia and they won't be paying the huge prices that this idiotic project will require to finance itself.

Result: Huge Profits for pipeline builders, massive profits for banks who finance and huge debt and losses for gullible tax payers who elect their leaders. Added bonus for future generations: environment disaster. Talk about lose lose.

If he was living in Alberta, next to a tailings pond, having his drinking water shipped in, maybe he'd have more credibility. Texas is a long way from pipelines spills.

Anderson would be more convincing if he was promising that his parent company would cover ALL costs of any environmental problem resulting in the shipping of Bitumen from BURNABY. That would include damage fire tanker spills in Canadian waters as well as those on land. I would like it in writing and signed off by Mr Kinder and Mr Morgan. I would also like to see the cash on deposit with the government.

Oh dear, poor mooha, the comment thread troll who supports Kinder Morgan. You're not doing KM any favours little troll, so you should quit now while you're behind.

I missed the part of the ad where he says they are paying for all policing and court costs.