Here's the piece.
It is on private property and privately owned, the news story claims.
This raises several interesting point, especially now that the mayor of Seattle agrees it should come down.
The argument comes down to personal Liberty and private property, does it not?
If so, the Commie-loving fcuktard who owns the statue should be permitted to own it, keep it and do as he wishes with it. That's the answer for true Patriots who understand Rightful Liberty. (That's not to say I'd weep if his neighbors burned his house to the ground...)
But now consider the Mayor's position - that it should be removed.
Wouldn't it set a nice precedent for the Leftists if they decreed that a man's personal property, situated on his privately-owned land, were subject to the whims and demands of the State?
They set the precedent with Lenin - then enforce it against anyone they choose in the future.