I'm not sure if he is a pathological liar, but he certainly has a victimization disorder of some kind.

On the subject of Red Tails, there was actually a movie already made about the Tuskegee Airmen a few years ago (one better made by most accounts), which makes his claims about difficulty getting support for the reasons he states very suspect. The whole "black people making accomplishments in early-mid-20th-century America in a military context" has become such a popular pseudo-genre that its practically a cliche--the fact that Cuba Gooding Jr is in the film is even part of the cliche! See: Men of Honor, Pearl Harbor. So I find it hard to believe there was so much against Lucas because he is so maverick. The film isn't maverick--it's very old-fashioned and traditional, and works within a genre cliche of the modern era. I do find it, however, very easy to believe some studio execs would pass on the film because the script was weak, as that's been one of the most consistent things said about the film now that it is actually out. It was the same thing with Radioland Murders--"oh, I'm so maverick this took me 25 years to get made because no studio could see the vision." Or: the film was a piece of shit, which is why smarter heads turned it down for two decades until he finally found an executive who couldn't refuse a modestly-budgeted George Lucas film, whereupon it was thrashed by critics and lost a ton of money before being entirely forgotten and ending the screenwriting career of Willard Huyck. Red Tails has done slightly better business and slightly better reviews than Radioland Murders, but the bar is pretty low there.