Why not depend exclusively on Spellcheck?

In my local rag, this morning, the editor ran an AP article about the move in some states to outlaw the common wildflower salvia divinorum (diviner's sage, a common plant indigenous to Mexico and points south). It seems some lawmakers think it's not enough to ban the actually dangerous drugs, and the so-called gateway drugs, and make it impossible for somebody with chronic sinus problems to keep a reasonable stock of decongestants.. now they want to ban another garden plant because some idiot might just ingest it and have a brief hallucination...

I gotta say, some of the stuff the local restaurants serve can probably cause a similar reaction.

The debate about legalizing vs. banning substances is a serious one, and most folks who know me know I'm not really big on government intervention in our private lives. I don't use the stuff, but I'm not agin the neighbors kickin' back and lightin' a doob, so long as they keep the high to themselves and keep the stereo turned down, once it's past my bedtime.

But that's not why I'm posting the article.

I'm posting the article because, even though there is such a thing as Spellcheck in most newspapers' computers, there is still a serious need for proofreaders. On the subject of SALVIA, our local rag ran this :


Kind of gives real potential for a spit-take, doesn't it?