I'm of two minds on how to handle Egypt and other emerging Arab democracies. The first is the hopeful, small-d democrat side, that wants to see folks have an honest shot at picking their leaders rather than dictating from the outside who those leaders can and can't be.
Here's a role-reversal that comes to mind; would we stomach seeing the Europeans and Japanese cutting off relations with a Romney administration because he's too culturally conservative, too Christian for civilized people to deal with? Would we tolerate outsiders saying that our leaders had to not be religious conservatives?
That's how some of the rhetoric from some quarters of the right would sound like to Abdul Q Public. If you tell him he has to vote for either the Mubarak leftovers or some egghead who spent more time in London and Palo Alto than in Cairo, that's not going to go over well.
What will a Muslim Brotherhood government look like? I'm not sure that it won't devolve into an Iranian style bounded-democracy, where you have to be approved by the Islamic powers that be to run and with civil rights only applying if you're what passes for a good Muslim. If it does, then plan B kicks in, but trying to do some Cold-War style coup and installing Mubarak 2.0 right now won't quite work.
Plan B could well look like making Islam the enemy if the bodies politic of enough Arab countries become radicalized and elect governments actively hostile to Western Civ. However, that's not how America rolls when it's on the side of the angels; the "he's a SOB but he's our SOB" school is best avoided.