Earlier today, the British government published a list of people barred from setting foot in the country. According to Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, the list identifies 16 purveyors of hate speech and extremism (there are another six that the government declined to make public). This rogue's gallery includes Muslim extremists, Russian gang members, an Israeli militant, a father-and-daughter team devoted to anti-gay agitation--and American talk-radio host Michael Savage.

Savage, who is based in San Francisco, has enraged multiple constituencies. He has called the Koran a "book of hate," and accused autistic children of faking it: "In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is." His high profile as a shock jock notwithstanding, it's a little surprising to see Savage singled out in this way--he's hardly the only vituperative voice in our polarized political landscape. Nor does he rise to the squalid level of, say, Samir Al Quntar, a serial killer whose victims include a four-year-old girl. The real question here is how Britain has chosen to balance the opposing demands of civility and free speech.

Not surprisingly, the reaction on the Web has been divided. Over at Women on the Web, chamdas hayomim suggested that excluding Savage was an act of cowardice: "London, why are you so afraid of Michael Savage? Because he may expose [to] the world that you are not the London of the past, because you lost your way. Instead of taking on the real challenge to battle your enemies within, the Muslim extremists who are terrorizing Jews & Christans on daily basis." Responded C. Aune: "LOL, the man should be banned from the human race, not just Britain." Added Diana T.: "Too bad he can't be banned to a solitary deserted island where no one can hear him except the one he adores the most."

Over at Twitter, the conversation was similarly divided between fans and opponents of the radio host. Noted @JoeCaruso: "Muslim hate-mongers are allowed in England. Conservative American Michael Savage is banned." But @jpzenger objected for entirely different reasons: "Not a fan of Michael Savage--UK ban is absurd--now he will have reason to whine endlessly about his 'ordeal.'" Meanwhile, @wolfbreath noted some incidental ironies: "LOL, don't know if it's funnier Michael Savage is listed w/ NeoNazis & terrorists, or that his real name is Weiner."

Savage has responded with a defense of his "traditional values"--you know, the ones that are supposed to save what he has called a "homosexualized, feminized America" from limp-wristed doom. Speaking to World Net Daily, he said: "It's interesting to me that here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence, who advocates patriotic traditional values--borders, language, culture--who is now on a list banned in England. What does that say about the government of England? It says more about them than it says about me."