cinnamon in your throat. jon: no, just a frog. thankfully it is gone. jenna: that segment later in the show. history in the making in washington as we head to day two of the health care showdown over the president's health care overhaul. i'm jenna lee. jon: i'm jon scott. can the government make americans buy health insurance. the supreme court taking up that constitutional question right now. they're in the middle of two hours of oral arguments from both side as protesting goes on outside. today's arguments focus on individual mandate. the most controversial part of the president's health care law. outside the high court protesters continue to make their voices heard. some of them have been here for days. byron york, chief political correspondent at the "washington examiner" and a fox news contributor. byron, good morning to you. not too overstating it to say this is a day that could change thing for every american for years to come. >> absolutely. this would be a huge fact it for president obama, obamacare, the national health care law, is his signature achievement of his time in office so far. having it struck down as unconstitutional or having the heart of it struck down as unconstitutional would be a major blow and major boon for mitt romney, rick santorum, newt gingrich, the republicans vying to replace him. you go to their rallies. every single rally the top applause line comes when the candidate pledges to repeal obamacare. jon: even democrats seem nervous about some of the prospects. congressman john larson was asked, what happens if the court strikes down the individual mandate? here's what he said? >> redouble the efforts and take to the streets, understanding that america is with us on this. understanding what this would mean in terms of women's health, alone. what it means in terms of the disparity, that this act corrects. jon: americans are with us on this? byron, has he been reading the polls? >> well the polls show a substantial majority of americans could like to see obamacare repealed and, even larger number of them believe it is on constitutional. i think what the congressman said is really important that a political fight is going to follow this ruling so that, if the court rules the individual mandate constitutional, republicans will in no way stop their desire, their drive to repeal obamacare. it will still be a big issue on the trail. might even revitalize the tea party a little bit. this is the kind of government expansion they were founded to oppose. on the other hand if the court found the mandate unconstitutional you would see democrats redoubling their efforts. a lot of them staked their reputation on this they tried to win for generations. they will try to find a way around the mandate to keep the law intact. jon: we'll talk a little more in the next hour what this means tore the tea party and whether it is upheld for struck down what does that do for the tea party. what about the president? the second anniversary of the signing of the bill into law just passed last week. we didn't see the president doing much about it. does know association with health care is not good for his political fortunes? >> well, as you mentioned the president does read the polls and he did not make a big deal of this. on the other hand if you look at the 17-minute biographical movie the obama campaign released a couple weeks ago, health care was a significant part of it and this is going to be, when the president goes out and campaigns, he is going to be saying, look, before me an insurance company could deny you coverage if you had a preexisting condition. it could throw you off the coverage rolls. today x-million more people are covered because of this law. he is even embraced the term, obamacare which, democrats and president didn't like for a long time. yeah, it will be part of his campaign. jon: byron york, from the "washington examiner". as we said a very big day. we'll keep an eye on all of the developments there. thanks, byron. >> thank you, jon. jenna: we move to this fox news alert a frightening scene in the foothills of colorado today. firefighters find at least one body in the ruins of a fast-moving wildfire west of denver. that is not the only one by the way. rick folbaum has more on this. rick? >> reporter: jenna, as we speak there is extreme fire danger across the entire state of colorado. more than a dozen fires in all. the biggest one you mentioned is jefferson county. it is called of the lower north fork fire. one person is dead there. several homes have been destroyed. not really sure what caused this. the sheriff's department said it may have been the wind blowing embers from a fire set on purpose last week as officials were trying to clear brush. one of those controlled fires officials set every now and then. whatever the cause it's a real problem for folks who live nearby. >> i'm really scared and getting afraid to leave. >> how worried are you right now? >> panic, panic. i really am. >> i'm grabbing personal papers. my dog, my cat, some clothes and pictures that can't be replaced. things like that. medicine. >> first time in 36 years i had to get out of here so. he have duty. >> it is kind of scary. it's real scary. so we're just hoping it doesn't blow this way. >> reporter: there are other fires. one in summit county, larimar county, pueblo county. other places too, jenna. jefferson county has more than one active fire. officials there have their hands full. officials all over the state very business civil the wind is not helping them. as we learn more about efforts to bring these fires under control we'll pass it along to you. jenna: rick, thank you. jon: the flames spreading amid dry and windy conditions. we called them chinook when i was growing up in colorado. what does the weather forecast look like for the firefighters? meteorologist, maria molina in the fox news weather center. >> jon, good to see you. unfortunately we're not expecting any big rainstorms to help us out across portions of colorado especially jefferson county where we have the big wildfire but there are two things that will be improving and help firefighters fight the fires. that is rise in humidity levels very slightly and winds will be calming down. those are two things that could help us out. no rain coming through saturday. a lot of sunshine. temperatures on the cool side for today. 59 should be the high. we'll see temperatures gradually rising. mid 60s as we head into the weekend. and winds out of the south generally 10 to 15 miles per hour. still breezy but not as strong as yesterday when we were talking about wind gusts in excess of 30, 40 miles per hour out across parts of colorado. today's fire danger does stretch a little further toward the northeast. we're looking at very strong winds in excess of 60 miles per hour at times across parts of south dakota, nebraska. it is also dry out here. we're looking at low humidity levels. this is the area we're talking about the greatest fire danger concern today. we have a storm system producing gusty winds stretching across portions of north dakota and minnesota. there is not a lot of moisture so there is not a lot of precipitation. we have a line of stronger storms across north central north dakota. as the system continues to head east later on today we're talking about severe weather risk in parts of indiana, illinois and missouri, large hail and wind gusts, isolated tornados can not be ruled out. temperatures 20 degrees above average. 79 in kansas city. jon: folks in illinois have to look for tornado possibilities again today. been rough. >> this time of the year. jon: maria, thank you. president obama once again caught with his microphone on, making not so private comments to another world leader. hmm. why mitt romney is calling mr. obama's remarks to the russian president troubling. ambassador john bolton weighs in. jenna: people rebuilding their lives in the wake of this immense destruction you're seeing on your screen. how one woman is using facebook to help tornado victims reconnect with some of their most precious memories. >> all right. >> come on. jon: these videos are everywhere online. kids gagging and coughing as they try to swallow a spoon full of dry cinnamon. doctors say though, this fad is nothing to laugh at. we'll expose the real dangers behind the so-called, cinnamon challenge. jon: new fallout today from the president's comments to russian president dmitry medvedev on missile defense caught on an open microphone. here is what the mics picked up at the tail end of their meeting in south korea. jon: well the president made light of that incident covering up the mic but went on to clarify his comments. >> when you think about new s.t.a.r.t. treaty that demitri and i were able to hammer out and ultimately get ratified, that was a painstaking two-year process. i don't think it is any surprise you can't start that a few months before a presidential and congressional elections in the united states and at a time when they just completed elections in russia and they're in the process of a presidential transition where a new president is going to becoming in a little less than two months. jon: gop presidential candidate mitt romney calls russia, our number one geopolitical foe and blasted the president. >> russia is not a friendly character on the world stage. for this president to be looking for greater flexibility where he doesn't have to answer to the american people in his relations with russia is very, very troubling, very alarming. i am, i am very, very concerned. i think the american people will feel the same way. this is a president who is telling us one thing and doing something else. jon: the white house blasting back. press secretary jay carney saying quote, in a world where al qaeda is so clearly the preeminent threat to the united states and similar organizations it seems a little inaccurate to make the statement about russia where russia is a country we've been able to cooperate with on very important issues even as we disagree with them on others, that includes missile defense and syria. jon: joining us with his take, john bolton, former u.s. ambassador to the united nations and a fox news contributor. of the president's quote to medvedev, you've been quoting saying there is huge cause for concern here, mr. ambassador. what do you mean? >> well, this is a fire bell in the night this comment by obama. you know, the only flexibility that he can be talking about, and i think you could see medvedev understood it perfectly, is giving away more from the american position on missile defense and more broadly on security issues. for the president to try and say today as he did, that you can't get something complicated starting in an election year is just dissembling. obviously he is saying to medvedev and the russian government generally, just wait until after the election is over and i can give way on points that i would be harshly criticized for in the united states if i surrendered them before the election. jon: what about jay carney's comment that al qaeda is more of a problem for the united states and groups like it, than say the russian government? >> well, maybe he should talk to the president more often. you know, if you listen to president obama having killed osama bin laden, al qaeda is not a threat anymore. it is just a small group of people on the pakistanney side of the afghan border, nothing to worry about there. we're going to negotiate with the taliban. let them back into power in afghanistan. al qaeda worldwide has been broken. i think mr. carney needs to talk to his boss. but in fact, romney's dead on right, russia still has the most massive nuclear weapons capability of any other country on earth and with incoming president putin by the way, a former president of russia, not somebody who as our president implied had to come back up to speed it is a real threat. that's why when you hear the president again giving way on american missile defense, defending our homeland, that is why i say it's a fire bell in the night. this is something that verges on the irresponsible for a president of the united states to say that to another world leader. jon: i wondered if the asked to the former soviet state of georgia how they feel about the russians after russia moved in and attacked them several summers ago and obliterated so much of that country, how they feel about russia and its taste for freedom? >> well, exactly. you will recall in august of 2008 when the russians did invade, then candidate obama called on both the george against and the russians, called on both sides to exercise restraint. that's like saying to the kid on the ground when the schoolyard bully is pounding them that both of those kids ought to exercise restraint. this is a signal of weakness by our president, a very revealing, obviously candid comment that he didn't think anybody else was going to overhear that our adversaries around the world understand is a sign of weakness and our friends worry about. this is real fire bell in the night. the white house will not wish this one away. jon: when it comes to missile defense and the size of our nuclear arsenal the president said he wants to drastically reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal. are those the kinds of things he could push through in a second term without maybe, well without having to answer to the voters certainly and maybe without necessarily heeding congress? >> well, there are a lots of indications the president already decided to take exactly that route to avoid the treaty mechanism and senate, requirement, constitutional requirement for senate approval. and this is something that in the national security field where the constitution obviously gives the president primacy he will have a lot of discretion. honestly i would worry about in the domestic sphere as well where he has already shown a preference for executive orders, i think this is the lesson of what happens if he gets reelected. jon: ambassador john bolton, fox news contributor. thank you. >> thank you. jenna: an atheist group is suing the state of pennsylvania over a resolution declaring 2012 the year of the bible. the group is claiming that amounts to state-sponsored religion. do they have a case? we have a fair and balanced legal debate on that, coming up. plus jon's favorite story always. a update on pink slime. just looking at it kinds of turn your stomach, right? growing public concern is, forcing the makers of this to do. we'll have an update on all of that coming up next. [ heart beating, monitor beeping ] woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen. jenna: new legal questions today after a national atheist group filed a lawsuit against the state of pennsylvania for declaring 2012 the year of the bible. the group is called freedom from religion foundation. they claim that the resolution amounts to state-sponsored religion and therefore is unconstitutional. that is not all. the group adds that the bible contains, quote, violent, sexist, and racist models of behavior that the members of this group find personally repugnant. the sponsor of the resolution, a local lawmaker, disagrees saying quote. it recognizes the significant impact the bible has had on our country. it in no way inhibits anyone from believing in any faith or no faith. who is right here? what is the case like? lis wiehl, fox news legal analyst and former federal prosecutor. frred tecce, former federal prosecutor. welcome to you both. they say the state is endorsing religion and site lates the constitution. is that true. >> they have a got a case. wonderful the resolution sounds benign, uplifting, and all that it has the mark of legislating religion. that arguably runs afoul of the definition of the separation between church and state. the whole establishment clause. look how courts have interpreted it. you can't even have the ten commandments in a courtroom, jenna. how will this fly? i think they have got got a case. i don't like the way they are pursuing it but they have a case. jenna: look about the case. not just about separation of church and state. they simply do not like the content of the bible as well. they say the content to encourage people to rely on the content of the bible and therefore, act in an maer harmful to them and to others. does that, us did that change their argument, the validity of it? >> well, it doesn't change their arguement. i think their argument is legal sophistry. their real problem is with the bible which they said in their words, contains, violent, sexist and racist overtones and is not a model for citizens of the united states. but i think their argument is really undermined by two things. first of all, under the u.s. constitution which is the standard by which this gets looked at, in 1983 ronald reagan and two houses of congress passed virtually the exact same type of resolution. this is resolution. it is not a law. secondly and more importantly if you look at pennsylvania constitution, the pennsylvania constitution refers to the almighty and gives thanks for civil and religious freedoms. this doesn't endorse any particular religion. the bible plays a great part. lis and i both put our hands on the bible swore to uphold the law when we became federal prosecutors. jenna: what about that, lis? >> that is true but if you don't want to put your hand on the bible or don't endorse the bible and you're excluded and excluded by a legislative branch that is the problem. i do not like the way they're going about it. i don't agree with what they're saying about the bible one iota but really they do have a case because other entities are excluded. why don't we have a year of the koran. jenna: make a point about ronald reagan. you brought this up. proclamation made in 1983. president reagan came out in 1983 declared the year of the bible. it was challenged by aclu but upheld by a federal district judge. what is the difference there? >> it was but the law changed since 1983 that being upheld. i don't think it would be upheld anymore, jenna. at this point when you do have the ten commandments and separation of the churches and in the schools, we have hanukkah in them, christmas issues, every single christmas and hanukkah time. the law evolved since 1983. i don't think this is a good example where you want to put this out there anymore. jenna: do you actually honor the history, fred? we do know the founders did want a separation of church and state but we also know they were spiritual people too. >> right. jenna: how do you honor that history? >> they were, they were. i don't think this crosses the line. it doesn't endorse any particular religion. that is the point. last time i looked bible has both old testament and new testament which runs across christianity. i don't think it endorses any particular religion. it is just a proclamation. >> it doesn't endorse the koran. doesn't endorse atheists. it is not all inclusive. jenna: use the example of the koran, fred. the koran did not have a part in u.s. history. >> that's true. >> let me ask you a question. i got to tell you, if they passed a proclamation, that is all this is, proclamation or resolution we recognize or we, we recognize or, not endorse but, you know, --. jenna:. >> you just said it, endorse. >> you can't say endorse. >> that's the point. that is point they're going to make, fred. jenna: rewind the tape. >> don't use the word endorse if you want to win. jenna: final thought, fred? >> i'm sorry? jenna: quick final thought f