We were pleasantly surprised to see Scott Walker move in our direction on immigration.  However, several major news organizations do not seem to buy Walker's supposed conversion.

According to Breitbart:

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker (R) said that “there’s a way” to have a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants while expressing his opposition to amnesty in an interview broadcast on “Fox News Sunday..."

Wallace continued to press Walker on a pathway to citizenship, Walker then said, “I believe there’s a way that you can do that. First and foremost, you have got to secure that border, or none of these plans make any sense.”

[Walker: 'There's a Way' You Can Have Path to Citizenship, by Ian Hanchett, March 1, 2015]

And Amnesty/Immigration Surge supporter Jamie Weinstein writes at the Daily Caller, 

Scott Walker wants you to know he now opposes “amnesty” — even as he says he supports a policy that amounts to “amnesty..."

WALLACE: The question [in 2013] was, ‘Can you envision a world where if these people paid a penalty that they would have a path to citizenship?’ and you said, ‘Sure, that makes sense.’

WALKER: I believe there’s a way you can do that. First and foremost, you have to secure that border, or none of these plans make any sense.

Did you catch the first part of Walker’s response? He said, “I believe there’s a way you can do that,” as in he can envision a scenario in which most of the illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States would be granted a pathway to citizenship in exchange for paying a financial penalty. (RELATED: All Potential 2016 Candidates Support ‘Amnesty’)

What Walker appears to be doing here is playing a game of semantics. He is defining “amnesty” to be something different from what the immigration hawks he is trying to court with his supposed change of heart believe it to be. To immigration hawks like Iowa Rep. Steve King, amnesty is any pathway to normalizing the immigration statuses of America’s illegal population, no matter whether those illegals would be forced to pay a financial penalty or even prevented from gaining citizenship.

[Walker Says He Doesn't Believe in 'Amnesty,' Before Saying He Supports an Amnesty, March 1, 2015]

Walker specifically said that putting "the onus on employers" and using E-Verify to enforce existing law was the key to solving the immigration issue.  However, Walker did leave at least an opening to some kind of future amnesty once the border of secured.

But as Walker also specifically stated he did not support "comprehensive" immigration reform, such an open door may not mean much.  Enforcing existing laws and imposing real border security would do much to solve the problem by itself, as cutting off the jobs market could lead to self-deportation.

Is Walker leaving a door open so he doesn't lose major donors?  Is he pulling the wool over patriots' eyes?  One of the glories of our democracy is that we are expected to be mind readers when voting for candidates as we take for granted we can't believe what they say.

That said, Walker is clearly moving in the right direction.  The real question is whether the Republican House will remain strong in its opposition to funding Obama's amnesty.

It's also a good thing when the press organs of the Beltway Right seem to be attacking Walker for not going far enough even when he takes steps in the right direction.