The editors of the Journal have been pretty tough on Senator Cruz (disclosure) — often tougher than I believe he has deserved. The Journal’s editorial on the senator’s entry into the race is, I’d say, tough but fair — with two brief exceptions.

The first: “The normally hawkish Senator also played the opportunist by opposing antiterror surveillance and Mr. Obama’s Syria 2013 bombing plan — lest he offend populist anti-Obama sentiment.” Was John Bolton also an opportunist for being normally hawkish but opposing the Syria bombing plan? Politicians often have political motives. But there’s no good reason someone can’t be a hawk on some issues and a dove on others; and it may be that there’s a sound position on surveillance somewhere between Lindsey Graham and Rand Paul.

The second: “Mr. Cruz’s hard-edged message against immigration may play in the GOP primaries . . .” Cruz is for a guest-worker program and open to offering legal status to illegal immigrants. He voted against an amendment to cap legal immigration over the next decade at 33 million. I can understand how, from the Journal’s perspective, Cruz seems too restrictionist. But I don’t think it’s right to say that Cruz has an anti-immigration message.

Update: Cruz also offered an amendment to expand H-1B visas by a factor of five.