I agree he has an ego, but other reports say he is nice, and who knows where his bigger side is. I have heard that John Lennon did indeed mellow over the years, and he was getting nicer - that is good on him.

I've read quite a few books on the Beatles, including a book that went through each of their songs and the comments both made about them.
They only had a real serious disagreement on two of them, I think. One was Eleanor Rigby. Forget the other one.
-I was born in a crossfire hurricane.

I'm with McCartney that if he ever wants to label songs that were significantly more largely his 'McCartney/Lennon', why should he be prevented? It's no fun being second in the list when you were first with the inspiration. Some people, including big fans, might think it shouldn't matter but Paul Simon might be displeased if it was Garfunkel and Simon. It could be ratified from many past interviews which songs are definitely eligible for it. Many of them are already widely known and will come as no surprise but rocking numbers like Sergeant Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour title songs and Oh Darling might have been unfairly pegged by some as largely Lennon songs.
In the last 10 years in particular, McCartney has been gracious towards Harrison and Lennon. He's played Something on the ukelele. He's even occasionally opened some of his concerts with a Lennon Beatles song. He's sometimes played Lennon solo songs too. He possibly still doesn't give Harrison his full due but nor do most of the public. Harrison fans may be vocal but when they get over-excited about Something and Here comes the sun to the exclusion of his other Beatles work, I think don't they get that those 2 songs are essentially like Harrison playing at being McCartney. Harrison's earlier songs were more Lennon-like.

Paul always seemed a little pompous and condescending, but I think at heart he's a good guy.
~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.

You know what's douchbaggyish? Making a bunch of unwanted babies and then paying off the mothers to shut them up about and ignoring the kids when wants their dad. If people could read German they'd read all about it in the German press which is conveniently hushed up in the British and American press. See how Bettina for on feels about it.

He was with Linda over 30 years, 3 kids.
She died of breast cancer.
He was traumatized as a child when his mum died suddenly of breast cancer.
Can you imagine?
Douchebag?
It's a wonder he's not a serial killer.
I wish him well.

Paul's songs should be labeled "McCartney/Lennon." It's only because of Yoko Ono and Lennon fanatics that he's been bashed for it.
And Lennon was far more of a douchebag. He always had a prickly demeanor, talking crap about Ringo, Paul and the Beatles for years.
What goes around (
), Comes around (
)

Artists take a lot of pride in their work and in a group situation, that can lead to competitiveness. Sometimes people say things they later regret. McCartney and Lennon are no different in that regard.

I've read "Many years from now" and I never saw a single quote where he sounded disrespectful or trying to take anything away from John.
The way he gives the songs to John or himself ("I would give 80 percent of that song to John") reflects almost perfectly the way I always considered them to be.
Listen to the songs: Who sings what. That's the best way of telling who wrote the song.
Lead singer = writer
One Strong lead vocal: One main writer
Two strong vocals: writing together
Strong second vocal: strong help in that part
Just as a general rule.
They both helped each other a lot. And they disagree only over very few songs (Paul mentioned his delight about that fact), "In my life" being the most famous one. Paul said to have written most of the music. And why not believe him? The melody is far more complex than most of John's songs, who tends to keep his melodies simple (e.g. Help, Lucy).
Please provide that link to try and prove your point.
But your thread title is not only disrespectful, it's not fitting the subject at all.
Ringo said once: "We have to thank Paul that we made so many albums".
He was the concerned one, and nobody likes these people - although they keep the world going.
John Lennon with his big mouth (insecure guy he was) and "I don't fing care!" attitude - that was cool!
But without Paul - where would the Beatles have gone?
Please show some respect.
"I'm a war president, I make decisions with war on my mind" (George W. Bush)

Shaolin, I will try to find the specific website with their side-by-side quotes about their "Lennon/McCartney" works, and post the link so that you can make up your own mind.
Room for one more, honey.

What Paul says is however probably the truth. Paul was giving hand or actively participating with Lennon's projects more often than Lennon would with Paul's. This would only change when Yoko appeared in the studio.
Instead of accusing Paul of egoism would you instead mention here a song or two, which Paul allegedly has claimed 'stealing thunder' of? Let's see the context.
"Play it again, Ingrid, I don't give a Dajm."

I think getting married on John's birthday was pretty douchbaggy-ish move. What date do we have to remember John without Paul, George, and Ringo? Even his death is covered by being Paul's granddaughter's birthday but with births, you can't help it exactly. With a marriage, it's a choice. I'm sure it's good-hearted but I'm not seeing it that way. Especially with a woman who has never even met John. Why couldn't Paul marry the day after? Or the day before? We already got a Lennon-McCartney day- it's July 6 when they met.
The secret of staying young is to live honestly, eat slowly, and lie about your age -Lucille Ball

I'm sure he does have a bigger ego than most of us, after all he's had 50 years of being constantly told how great he is from all corners of the globe.
I think most of the occassions where he has tried to stake his claim over certain songs are more to do with his battles with Yoko than anything to do with his relationship with John.
I also remember seeing a documentary very recently where Paul was talking about "And I Love Her" (very much regarded as a McCartney song) and he went out of his way to point out that the main riff throughout the song (you know that 4 note riff that opens the song on guitar and appears throughout) was completely George Harrison's idea, and that it lifted the song to become something far better than it would have been without.
But back to your original point - Paul's ego - yes of course he's got an ego, who wouldn't in is position. I just hope he can see past that soon to re-evaluate where his career goes from here with regards to his future as a live performer, as that really needs addressing before he screws up his voice permanantly.