The Dubai Ports Deal: Should the Dems Play Hardball?

So, the Dubai ports deal naturally sent up red flags for most of us, but a little reflection and a little information immediately revealed that it wasn't at all clear whether it would harm national security. And, as far as I can tell, the jury's still out on that (though Mark Kleiman points to evidence that port operators do operate port security).

But, let's say that the Dubai deal turns out to be innocuous in fact, but wildly unpopular. Should the Dems exploit this against the Cheney/Rove administration? I mean, that bunch has used every dirty trick in the book against the Dems, with the effect of putting the U.S. and the world in general in a helluva tight spot. In fact, this administration is so bad and so incompetent that the Dems may even have an obligation to play real hardball in order to wrest some power away from these guys and try to get us back on something approximating a sane course. But in the case at hand this would seem to mean that they should demagogue the ports issue even if there's nothing in fact wrong with it.

Idealist that I am, I always try to cheat by opting out of these decisions, thinking something like if they just went to the American people and said something like "look, we could use this deal to beat them with, but the deal is actually not all that bad. But take this as a sign of our honesty and believe us when we say: they've done much worse in the past, such as..." etc.

Silly, huh? Where have I been for the last five years?

But if I had to choose I'd choose honesty. Don't stoop to their level. If the deal really isn't that bad, admit it and move on. Hammer 'em on the stuff that is bad and hope that the people see the light. Don't play on the public's fear and ignorance (supposing, for the sake of argument, that that's what it is). There's been enough of that lately to last a long time.