Is it possible to read President Trump’s inaugural speech in a dispassionate manner? With his devotees fawning over every word and his critics branding the speech “Hitlerian,” it can be challenging to stand above the fray and give it an impartial reading. But, it certainly can be done. As Ben Shapiro recently tweeted, “This is not hard. When Trump does good things, praise him. When Trump does bad things, condemn him. Basic decency is not tough.”

This is not hard. When Trump does good things, praise him. When Trump does bad things, condemn him. Basic decency is not tough.

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) January 22, 2017

First, here’s a tweet-worthy summary of the speech: It’s time to give power back to the people and make America great again by putting America first.

One journalist pointed out how few times Trump said “I” and how frequently he said “we,” in contrast, it was alleged, with President Obama, who was famous for his I-centric speeches. But that is a superficial analysis, since, in his 2009 inaugural speech, incoming President Obama’s I-we percentage was even better than Trump’s, and it was common for other presidents to do the same in their opening addresses.

More to the point, does anyone really think that we will not be hearing a lot of “I” and “me” from our president in the days ahead? The power of Donald Trump is directly tied to his personality, for better or for worse.

A Blow to the Outgoing President

As for the content of his speech, he began by addressing “Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow Americans, and people of the world,” stating, “We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and to restore its promise for all of our people.”

On the one hand, other incoming presidents have described their vision using terms like “renewal” (as did JFK in 1961), as if there had been decay and ruin before them. But for Trump to speak of the “great national effort to rebuild our country and to restore its promise for all of our people” is to say something very specific and clear: America was collapsing under Barack Obama; America had lost its way under Barack Obama; now is the time to rebuild and restore.

Can you imagine how it felt to be the outgoing POTUS and FLOTUS as those words were spoken? To paraphrase, “Your administration has made a total mess of things and destroyed what made our country great. It’s time to fix the mess you made.”

Is there any other interpretation to put on Trump’s words? I think not. The fact that he immediately commended the former president and first lady, saying, that “they have been magnificent” during the transition did not remove the sting.

Donald Trump, or Robin Hood?

But it was not just President Obama who failed America, according to President Trump. No, it was all of Washington, and our new president, a Washington outsider, made a formal declaration of war: It’s time to take the power away from the political establishment and give “it back to you, the American People.”

Indeed, “For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished — but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered — but the jobs left, and the factories closed.”

Yes, “The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs; and while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.”

According to Trump, all of Washington is guilty right now, and he is the Robin Hood who will take from the unlawfully rich and redistribute the funds to the hurting citizens of our nation.

Who are the members of that “small group” in Washington, the ones who make up “the establishment”? What are the names of those politicians who are prospering at the expense of their constituents? Does the list include Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer who participated in the inauguration or perhaps their Democratic colleagues who boycotted the event? Does it include Republicans like Paul Ryan, also involved with the inauguration, or other Republicans who are part of the establishment?

Without further specificity, all of Washington is guilty right now, and Trump is the Robin Hood who will take from the unlawfully rich and redistribute the funds to the hurting citizens of our nation. As he said, “That all changes — starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.”

And his promise was bold: “January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.”

This is why many Americans voted for him, and this was a centerpiece of his speech, including this audacious claim: “You came by the tens of millions to become part of a historic movement the likes of which the world has never seen before. At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction: that a nation exists to serve its citizens.”

Worldwide history was being made, and the power of self-serving government was being broken.

How Will Trump Keep These Promises?

Can Trump deliver on even a fraction of this promise? Can he dismantle the power of the very establishment whose votes he needs to accomplish his goals? In my view, he can only do it by: 1) effectively exposing and then cutting through Washington bureaucracy, using his public platforms to embarrass those who play political games; 2) aggressively paring down the size of the government; and 3) empowering his appointees (like Betty DeVos) to offer non-centralized, non-Washington-run alternatives (like school choice).

And although Trump didn’t use the word “indignant,” this is clearly what he meant when he spoke of “the just and reasonable demands of a righteous public.” They want America back!

Surprisingly, he focused on the bleak condition of our inner cities — in graphic detail, at that — from poverty to broken homes to a failed education system to no jobs to gangs, but this was followed by his Trumpian promise: “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.”

Hopefully, Trump will look to grassroots agents of change, starting with his solid Christian connections, rather than lean on welfare politics.

Apparently, he is genuinely concerned with (or, at the least, bothered by) the state of our inner cities (as friends connected to him have privately reported to me), and he did well by making this a problem for all Americans to solve: “We are one nation — and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny.”

How can this be done? Obviously, not through Washington, DC, which can only play a small role in rebuilding our broken nation. Instead, there must be empowerment of the people, and if former football great Ray Lewis has reportedly things accurately, Trump was very impressed with the work of football legend Jim Brown, devoted to making gang members into solid citizens.

What role is the church to play? Hopefully, Trump will look to grassroots agents of change, starting with his solid Christian connections, rather than lean on welfare politics, which increase, rather than decrease, the real needs of the inner cities.

“America First” — Meaning What, Exactly? 

But the focus on fixing the inner cities prepared the way for Trump’s gradual crescendo, with the emphasis on one concept: America first. To paraphrase again: “We’ve helped the rest of the world at the expense of our own nation. This stops here today, and I’m shouting that out for the whole world to hear.”

In his exact words: “We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power.” From here on, every decision that is made — from jobs to security to immigration to infrastructure — “will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American.”

Is this a hyper-nationalistic, über-populist, xenophobic vision, one that could be compared to Germany during the rise of Adolph Hitler? Is it perhaps not quite so dangerous but still narrow-minded and selfish, echoing Pat Buchanan’s “America first” cry from 2000? Or is it the logical and right strategy for every nation on the planet, as Trump said, “We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world — but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.”

Yes, every nation should put its own interests first — a slap in the face to the globalist mentality — and if America is healthier, the world will be healthier. But for Trump, this does not mean dominating the rest of the world. Instead, “We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow.”

In my view, this is the most ambiguous part of his speech: What exactly does “America first” mean? How exactly will it play out? Obviously, this remains to be seen.

To his credit, Trump said three words that Barack Obama has refused to say for 8 years and which Hillary Clinton would have surely refused to say if elected: “radical Islamic terrorism.”

To his credit, though, in his very first speech as president, Trump said three words that Barack Obama has refused to say for 8 years and which Hillary Clinton would have surely refused to say if elected: “radical Islamic terrorism.” This he pledged to“eradicate completely from the face of the Earth” with the cooperation of like-minded nations.

Words of Unity After Words of Division

Coming back to his vision for America itself, he stated that “through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other,” also claiming that, “When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice” (with a nod to Psalm 133:1).

And it was this call to unity amid our disagreements that undergirded the climax of his speech, because, “When America is united, America is totally unstoppable.”

The only way Trump will succeed in rallying us together is by dropping the unnecessary attacks on others, toning down the rhetoric, and fulfilling some of his promises.

The obvious problem, however, is that Trump’s whole style of campaigning and leading has been as unifying as it has been dividing — have we had a more polarizing figure in memory? — and it appears that the only way he will succeed in rallying us together is by dropping the unnecessary attacks on others, toning down the rhetoric, and fulfilling some of his promises.

After all, the average American is more moved by a healthy economy and a feeling of security than by all kinds of political bantering. Indeed, he proclaimed, “A new national pride will stir our souls, lift our sights, and heal our divisions.”

The idea is certainly right; making it happen is a very tall order, barring a national catastrophe (God forbid) that would bring us together by default.

Moving towards his conclusion, he stated that military and law enforcement will protect us — an obvious word of solidarity in contrast with some of the negative sentiments of the previous administration — and with Americans feeling safe and secure, “we must think big and dream even bigger.”

Americans must not stop striving to be great, and if anyone stands in our way, including, “politicians who are all talk and no action — constantly complaining but never doing anything about it” — they will be removed: “The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.”

And then, his final inspirational words, which in my judgment, represented his best teleprompter delivery to date, climaxing with the emphasis on “you,” the people of America, before ending with a resounding “we.”

“Together, We will make America strong again.

“We will make America wealthy again.

“We will make America proud again.

“We will make America safe again.

“And yes, together, we will make America great again. Thank you. God bless you. And God bless America.”

There’s Great Potential — For Success, and Failure

What are we to make of this? I am convinced that President Trump will work tirelessly and that he and his team will be doers and not just talkers; I have no doubt that he must become more of a statesman if America is to unite around him on any serious level; and I do believe that putting America first in a healthy way will benefit the whole world.

The dangers are that his attack on the establishment (which, indeed, must be confronted) will lead to governmental paralysis; that he will become more contentious, not less contentious, thereby deepening our divides; and that his America first emphasis will appeal to our baser instincts, thereby making us anything but truly great.

Have the possibilities for good or bad ever been more stark and more real at one and the same time?

I’d say now is a good time to pray for our president like never before. The stakes have never been higher.