My Pearl Harbor Moment

 

On April 5, the Surgeon General warned us that we needed to brace ourselves for the worst week in our lives. The coming week, and the week that followed, were expected to be the pinnacle of the crisis, and we had to be prepared: “This is going to be our Pearl Harbor moment, our 9/11 moment, only it’s not going to be localized. It’s going to be happening all over the country, and I want America to understand that.”

But now that we have made it through the hell that was the last two weeks, I find myself with a moment to look back on the miseries I have just survived, as difficult as it is to think about some of them.

Like the time last week when my daughter put a particular flavor of gelato on the grocery list. But the first store I went to didn’t have that flavor, so I had to go to another store.

Or the time I was in the mood for a good burger, but I discovered that our favorite local burger place was temporarily closed. I thought about just going to McDonald’s, but they’re offering only a limited menu right now, and I didn’t feel like compromising.

And then, on another night when we were in the mood for Mexican, the local place was so busy that they didn’t answer the phone the first time I called to place an order. I had to call them again from the parking lot and then sit there and wait for almost 15 minutes before they brought our order out to the car.

Meanwhile, the liquor store has adopted a “one customer at a time” policy, so I had to wait in line outside for almost five minutes before my turn.

But on a more serious note, I have been watching as our state grapples with a health-care crisis of unimaginable proportions. According to the statistics I’ve seen, our hospitals are almost nearly overwhelmed, with several hundred of the state’s 7,000 hospital beds occupied.

I knew, before the Surgeon General’s wakeup call, that this pandemic was going to be very hard on some people in some places. That there were people who were sick, and others who were putting their lives on the line to help them. But if I hadn’t been warned, I wouldn’t have known that during these last two weeks the suffering would spread to every corner of the country and be the “hardest and saddest” time in most of our lives. And yet somehow we survived.

Someday people will ask me what it was like to live through the national hell that was April of 2020, and I will just have to tell them: “There’s no way you can possibly understand.”

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 38 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):
    But your boat could break down and you requiring rescuing thus putting lives in danger.

    Danger? From me?? I live alone on a freaking sailboat! And we drink Pusser’s rum on my boat – viruses flee this stuff, the same way human mortals should.

    You need to sneak out of the harbor and go someplace friendlier.

    • #31
  2. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    I have lived on my sailboat, spring, summer, and fall, alone, for the past ten years. In a marina with 90 other boats. Few others live aboard, so most of the time I am alone in the whole boat basin. But others come and go, and we are all responsible people. There is an occasional picnic together, but they are not necessary in these times, and probably wouldn’t be organized this season.

    But now I am told that my boat may not be launched so I can sail up to the club, because sailing is “non-essential”. It may be (to you), but it is also not dangerous in any way, virus-wise. So why is it banned? What is the logic? What does depriving me of what is my home for the next six months serve?

    I thought banned things were supposed to be things where congregating takes place, and there is an obvious good chance of breathing all over each other, but which are deemed “non-essential”. Like movie theaters, restaurants, subway cars.

    To ban so called “non-essential” things where no congregating takes place, where there is little to no chance of breathing on each other, is pointless, mean, and demonstrably counter-productive.

    You can keep people conforming to the distancing rules – keeping themselves and others safe – and putting up with governmental obtuseness and glory-seeking, a lot longer if you back off from simply forbidding everything you can think of that’s not a grocery store. Most things we do are not dangerous, virus-wise.

    But your boat could break down and you requiring rescuing thus putting lives in danger.

    Oh, for crying out loud.

    • #32
  3. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    I have lived on my sailboat, spring, summer, and fall, alone, for the past ten years. In a marina with 90 other boats. Few others live aboard, so most of the time I am alone in the whole boat basin. But others come and go, and we are all responsible people. There is an occasional picnic together, but they are not necessary in these times, and probably wouldn’t be organized this season.

    But now I am told that my boat may not be launched so I can sail up to the club, because sailing is “non-essential”. It may be (to you), but it is also not dangerous in any way, virus-wise. So why is it banned? What is the logic? What does depriving me of what is my home for the next six months serve?

    I thought banned things were supposed to be things where congregating takes place, and there is an obvious good chance of breathing all over each other, but which are deemed “non-essential”. Like movie theaters, restaurants, subway cars.

    To ban so called “non-essential” things where no congregating takes place, where there is little to no chance of breathing on each other, is pointless, mean, and demonstrably counter-productive.

    You can keep people conforming to the distancing rules – keeping themselves and others safe – and putting up with governmental obtuseness and glory-seeking, a lot longer if you back off from simply forbidding everything you can think of that’s not a grocery store. Most things we do are not dangerous, virus-wise.

    But your boat could break down and you requiring rescuing thus putting lives in danger.

    Oh, for crying out loud.

    Phil, he’s joking.  But you’re right, it’s not funny. I get that reaction from people i long considered sane.

    Ironically, just yesterday I mentioned the boat situation to a friend, hoping for some sympathy. He has been out sailing with me several times. Instead I got a stern look, and a “Bruce, c’mon. Boating is non-essential. Better safe than sorry.”

    [insert teeth grinding]

    • #33
  4. Architectus Coolidge
    Architectus
    @Architectus

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    I have lived on my sailboat, spring, summer, and fall, alone, for the past ten years. In a marina with 90 other boats. Few others live aboard, so most of the time I am alone in the whole boat basin. But others come and go, and we are all responsible people. There is an occasional picnic together, but they are not necessary in these times, and probably wouldn’t be organized this season.

    But now I am told that my boat may not be launched so I can sail up to the club, because sailing is “non-essential”. It may be (to you), but it is also not dangerous in any way, virus-wise. So why is it banned? What is the logic? What does depriving me of what is my home for the next six months serve?

    I thought banned things were supposed to be things where congregating takes place, and there is an obvious good chance of breathing all over each other, but which are deemed “non-essential”. Like movie theaters, restaurants, subway cars.

    To ban so called “non-essential” things where no congregating takes place, where there is little to no chance of breathing on each other, is pointless, mean, and demonstrably counter-productive.

    You can keep people conforming to the distancing rules – keeping themselves and others safe – and putting up with governmental obtuseness and glory-seeking, a lot longer if you back off from simply forbidding everything you can think of that’s not a grocery store. Most things we do are not dangerous, virus-wise.

    But your boat could break down and you requiring rescuing thus putting lives in danger.

    Oh, for crying out loud.

    Phil, he’s joking. But you’re right, it’s not funny. I get that reaction from people i long considered sane.

    Ironically, just yesterday I mentioned the boat situation to a friend, hoping for some sympathy. He has been out sailing with me several times. Instead I got a stern look, and a “Bruce, c’mon. Boating is non-essential. Better safe than sorry.”

    [insert teeth grinding]

    It would appear that a certain type of madness has been spreading faster than any Chinese virus…

    • #34
  5. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    I have lived on my sailboat, spring, summer, and fall, alone, for the past ten years. In a marina with 90 other boats. Few others live aboard, so most of the time I am alone in the whole boat basin. But others come and go, and we are all responsible people. There is an occasional picnic together, but they are not necessary in these times, and probably wouldn’t be organized this season.

    But now I am told that my boat may not be launched so I can sail up to the club, because sailing is “non-essential”. It may be (to you), but it is also not dangerous in any way, virus-wise. So why is it banned? What is the logic? What does depriving me of what is my home for the next six months serve?

    I thought banned things were supposed to be things where congregating takes place, and there is an obvious good chance of breathing all over each other, but which are deemed “non-essential”. Like movie theaters, restaurants, subway cars.

    To ban so called “non-essential” things where no congregating takes place, where there is little to no chance of breathing on each other, is pointless, mean, and demonstrably counter-productive.

    You can keep people conforming to the distancing rules – keeping themselves and others safe – and putting up with governmental obtuseness and glory-seeking, a lot longer if you back off from simply forbidding everything you can think of that’s not a grocery store. Most things we do are not dangerous, virus-wise.

    But your boat could break down and you requiring rescuing thus putting lives in danger.

    Oh, for crying out loud.

    Phil, he’s joking. But you’re right, it’s not funny. I get that reaction from people i long considered sane.

    Ironically, just yesterday I mentioned the boat situation to a friend, hoping for some sympathy. He has been out sailing with me several times. Instead I got a stern look, and a “Bruce, c’mon. Boating is non-essential. Better safe than sorry.”

    [insert teeth grinding]

    Reverse Bill of Rights:  Anything not specifically allowed is forbidden. 

    • #35
  6. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):
    Phil, he’s joking. But you’re right, it’s not funny. I get that reaction from people i long considered sane.

    That’s why all governors are going to have to require the sarcasm font when their underlings post sarcastically. It’s getting more difficult to tell the difference.

    • #36
  7. Bartholomew Xerxes Ogilvie, Jr. Coolidge
    Bartholomew Xerxes Ogilvie, Jr.
    @BartholomewXerxesOgilvieJr

    Maybe this isn’t necessary, because most commenters seem to have gotten my point. But since this post got promoted, I feel like I need to add some comments of my own.

    I wrote this post and saved it and debated for a while before finally deciding to publish it. I was hesitant because I knew that someone would miss my point. Nowhere did I say that the pandemic was trivial, nor did I suggest that people weren’t suffering; in fact, I revised my post before publishing it, going out of my way to acknowledge those facts explicitly.

    My point was simply to draw attention to the overblown, apocalyptic statements some of the experts had made, in which they warned that all of us, everywhere in the country, would be enduring unprecented misery during the middle of April. The experts naturally have their attention focused on the places where the crisis is at its worst, and that’s as it should be; but they need to be careful not to let their laser focus make them think everyone, everywhere, is dealing with the same problems they are. Quite simply, we aren’t.

    So when the surgeon general said that all of us, in all parts of the country, needed to brace ourselves for the worst week in our lives, that was counterproductive, in that it accomplished little but to stir up anxiety and despair, and to detract from his own credibility. This pandemic is extremely serious. It doesn’t need to be exaggerated.

    • #37
  8. Painter Jean Moderator
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    Bartholomew Xerxes Ogilvie, Jr. (View Comment):

    Maybe this isn’t necessary, because most commenters seem to have gotten my point. But since this post got promoted, I feel like I need to add some comments of my own.

    I wrote this post and saved it and debated for a while before finally deciding to publish it. I was hesitant because I knew that someone would miss my point. Nowhere did I say that the pandemic was trivial, nor did I suggest that people weren’t suffering; in fact, I revised my post before publishing it, going out of my way to acknowledge those facts explicitly.

    My point was simply to draw attention to the overblown, apocalyptic statements some of the experts had made, in which they warned that all of us, everywhere in the country, would be enduring unprecented misery during the middle of April. The experts naturally have their attention focused on the places where the crisis is at its worst, and that’s as it should be; but they need to be careful not to let their laser focus make them think everyone, everywhere, is dealing with the same problems they are. Quite simply, we aren’t.

    So when the surgeon general said that all of us, in all parts of the country, needed to brace ourselves for the worst week in our lives, that was counterproductive, in that it accomplished little but to stir up anxiety and despair, and to detract from his own credibility. This pandemic is extremely serious. It doesn’t need to be exaggerated.

    I like those last two sentences in particular.

    By the way, I wasn’t reacting to your post when I objected to the use of the word “trivial”. It was a comment made by someone else, who has since clarified what he meant.

    • #38
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.