Include. The argument against, "We can not claim neutrality while deliberately abetting Savage's personal campaign against Santorum" makes little sense. Rather, we cannot claim neutrality while deliberately censoring a link to the very website that is the topic of this article. That Wikipedia may be perceived as non-neutral by including the link is irrelevant; Wikipedia is already perceived that way by ideological groups who object to articles they disagree with. Santorum, with the help of Savage, brought this notoreity upon himself. It is notable enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia. There is no reason to exclude a relevant link, particularly when the entire topic of this article derives from the web site. ~