I think most of us here agree that ditching the Gulfstream will do wonders for the environment; but this isn't a pitch for "Arnold is living the best life for the environment."

He is a man who is becoming more conscious of his meat intake and taking steps to reduce that and his footprint.

Can he do better? Of course! Does that negate the validity of the argument that reduction of meat intake is a good idea for the environment? Nope.

The overall point is that we can all take little steps to reduce our footprint and meat is just one of them.

That said, it is quite amazing just how much fuel has he used.

> Does that negate the validity of the argument

Does that matter? Most people will just say "What a hypocrite" and ignore the message. People don't respond well to logic, they respond to emotion. A valid argument that doesn't convince anyone is worthless.

I'm saying it's a glaringly bad strategy. Buy hey, continue trotting out complete and utter hypocrites to lecture us on what ought to feed our families for dinner.