The “merry” and “happy” days are gone and football is here.

I thought it would be a good time to face reality, so Sunday evening, Jan. 6, I took a little trip to Cornfield County to visit with Buck and Roy and the whole “Hee Haw” gang.

Their donkey said, “You don’t have to hang from a tree to be a nut.”

That made me think of two things I had read in the Salisbury Post.

The first one was the Jan. 6 editorial, “Was prayer lawsuit worth the price?” It stated, “We were particularly perplexed by a statement by Commissioner Judy Klusman in the story about Monday’s meeting.” Imagine that.

The second one was back on Nov. 6, 2018. The headline read, “Are nuts good for you? Well, some of them are, in moderation.”

After reading that story, I was about as confused as a termite in a yo-yo.

In all of my research and world travels, all nuts are good for you, in moderation, unless you’re allergic to them.

A question in that story was, “Are almonds bad for you?”

That’s about like asking the question “is kissing bad for you?”

Well, if you’re a Baptist it is. They’re scared it might lead to dancing.

In the chart, some nuts were salted and others were unsalted. That would be like comparing cabbage to sauerkraut. Also in the chart, peanuts were listed, but not donuts.

Peanuts are a legume that grow in the ground and donuts are dough that grow in grease.

I reckon that donkey was right.

So how are these two stories — the prayer lawsuit and are nuts good for you — connected? Both get an acronym.

N.U.T.S. (Not Understanding The Story) for the write-up about nuts being healthy or not, and N.U.T.S. (Never Underestimate Their Stupidity) for the prayer lawsuit.

— Whitey Harwood

Rowan County