If the newsletters were written by Paul sure I would be fine with labeling them Paul s You have a source for that Note that I don t deny the facts but rather dispute it follows logically that these are his newsletters It is also a question of semiotics when I hear Paul s newsletters I picture him sitting over his typewriter cranking out the latest issue or at least Paul actively editing and overseeing the publication I do not picture an operation sixty miles away with ghostwriters publishing a newsletter under his name while Paul is busy delivering babies elsewhere Claiming we know it is Paul s newsletter is misleading