ALL-IN IS THE WEAKER MOVE

Here's a poker argument we can have forever, going all-in before the flop in tournament poker is weaker than a proper raise.  Here's a hand I just played as an example:
It's a deep-stack tournament at Hustler Casino in Gardena, CA.  It's 15 minutes past the 2nd break and about half the starting field remains.  The blinds are $600-$1200 with $100 ante, 4 tables of 9 are still seated.  I've been at this table for 2 rotations and have yet to play a hand.  I'm in the cutoff when the cards come out.

Under-the-gun min. raises to $2400.  Three folds to a call, then fold to me and I wake-up with two Queens.  The antes are $900, blinds are $1800, bet and call total $4800 so the pot sits at $7500.  I have $26,400, which is about the same as the first raiser and considerably covers the caller.  What to do?

(Just to be clear, the caller between us isn't a factor because I've been with him for more than a hour and I know he isn't a factor.  He's fishing with two cards that please him.  If he had a raising hand, he'd have raised.  So I already know that I'm only playing against the first player.)

If I smooth-call and fold after the flop I'm left with 20 big-blinds and am basically in the same place as before the hand.  It's safe, prudent, and gives me a chance play the board to my best advantage.  If I choose to raise, which with Queens is practically a given, it has to be enough to hurt a little, the one-hole may read it as a squeeze play.  If we see a flop I want to be reasonably sure I'm against either A-Big or, ideally, two Jacks.  I don't want to have to sweat the suited-connector.

If I shove all-in, I eliminate all but the two hands that beat me.  It would be unreasonable to call $22,000 to win $32,000.  There's always the chance that the minimum bet pre-flop from the one hole could be an AA or KK trap, but the blinds are plenty high enough to steal, and it's also the time in the tournament to stack up for the coming blinds.

And here's the problem.  I have come to believe that the all-in bet is an easier call in tournament play than a proper raise.  There's a psychological compulsion to call all-in bets because the threat of paying more chips after the flop is eliminated, as is being out of position.  People seem to overplay Ace-Big more for ridiculous pot-odds if it's all-in.  Maybe there's a television factor as well.  Players anymore seem to imagine themselves playing on TV, and the all-in race with the cards open is deliciously sexy.

Which is exactly how the hand played out.  I raised all-in, and the one-hole called $22,000 into a $32,000 pot.  He was holding A-K.  A gift, I grant you, I want to play this hand all day every day.  But I did not shove in order to sweat the flop, I wanted the dead money in the middle and on with it.  As it turned out it was a brutal suck... the flop came 10-Q-5, and of course the Jack hit the turn.  (I begged the dealer to give him one more Jack just to make sure he had the straight... but no dice.)

So I conclude that the right play was to raise $8000.  I can never know if this guy doesn't shove behind me anyway with A-K, in which case I probably call and nothing changes.  Maybe I fold keep playing.  I don't know.  But I insist that the threat of paying the 8k, then being bet off the flop is a stronger play.  In fact, I insist that the $8,000 raise causes the player to calculate the bad odds for A-K, out of position, and I'll see him fold more often than the crazy all-in call.

What say you?