The recession has led everyone with a budget to question ever line. From households to businesses to state and federal governments, nothing is sacred. Finding new ways to get the same result without spending the same amount mean not having to make sacrifices. NASA has been under considerable financial pressure, as many question the value of sinking cash into space travel. So, it has to get creative in justifying its existence ... and in generating excitement about the agency and what it does.

When the space shuttle launches on Monday, 200 thumbs will be at the ready. NASA has deputized 100 of its top fans on Twitter to come to the launch and tweet the experience. These fans are estimated to have more than 150,000 followers, all with the potential to retweet the messages they see. Every click of an iPhone or Blackberry will give NASA more exposure, building the excitement it needs to keep the operation afloat. So, whether you realize it or not, the launch is being brought to you by Twitter, Apple (AAPL) and Research in Motion (RIMM), even if only implicitly.

Let's talk about investment risk and alien sightings. How do you assess risk? What is your exposure? What are the odds? What kind of fact checking do you do? What return is appropriate for what level risk? What is your time frame? Do you ask yourself the hard questions?

An ex-astronaut claims that the aliens have landed on earth. According to CNN: former NASA astronaut Edgar Mitchell and other UFO enthusiasts are concerned, the real story is happening elsewhere. Mitchell, who was part of the 1971 Apollo 14 moon mission, asserted Monday that extraterrestrial life exists, and that the truth is being concealed by the United States and other governments.

All of this alien talk is baloney. The "government" could not keep a secret if the entire universe were at risk. The odds that multiple governments could keep a common secret and that not one person would provide the slightest conclusive evidence are microscopic.

Yippee! Hooray! Just received updated information from John Spencer the Director of Red Planet Ventures, that NASA will not be mothballing either of the solar-powered Mars exploration land rovers Spirit or Opportunity. I am sure I was not the only one that was dismayed by the original decision when I posted Mars rover is over: LMT, RTN, billionaires please inquire.

THE PLOY:

• From What's New: It's a lot easier to get Congress to create popular new initiatives than to pay the cost of keeping them up. The most popular tourist attraction in the Capital is the Washington Monument; if Congress threatens to cut its operating budget the Park Service announces it will have to close the Monument. Told on Tuesday that the cost of the Mars Rover mission must be cut 40%, Steve Squyres of Cornell, the PI, announced that either Spirit or Opportunity would have to be euthanized or at least hibernate for the rest of the fiscal year. Are they kidding? The cyber generation has bonded with the rovers. Designed for a three month lifetime, the cuddly rovers have been going for four years, living on sunshine and never complaining about the cold nights. You might as well announce that the National Zoo plans to cut expenses by tossing the panda cubs into the piranha tank. That was clear to, Michael Griffin, NASA Administrator, and on Wednesday he ordered the budget cut rescinded immediately. (3/28)

NASA says it has absolutely no plan to turn off either of the Mars Rovers because of budget cuts as previously reported NASA order to cut $4 million. NASA is now saying that it has rescinded a letter that recommended budget cuts in the Mars Rover program to cover the cost of a next-generation rover on the Red Planet.

It's nice to share some good news once in a while.

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture & planning firm. He writes the columns Chasing Value and Serious Money.

With the U.S. economic landscape remaining uncertain, it's prudent to add a defensive stock or two to your portfolio, and with the aforementioned in mind Alliant Techsystems is worth an evaluation.

Alliant Techsystems (NYSE: ATK) is an ammunition supplier and rocket engine / motor manufacturer with substantial United States Government contracts.

Analysts like Alliant's strong fundamentals, solid U.S. Department of Defense orders for ammunition, equally impressive launch systems work from NASA, and sporting ammunition business.

Analysts also believe ATK is well-positioned to capture a portion of the U.S. DOD's work for next-generation weapon systems.

Meanwhile, margins should improve slightly in F2008 to 11%, and costs, while not low, are reasonable. The Reuters F2008/F2009 EPS consensus estimates for ATK are $6.39/$7.38.

The risks? An early withdrawal of U.S troops from Iraq would lower ATK's revenue for F2009-F2010. Analysts are also keeping an eye on the company's productivity per man hour.

The First Call mean rating for ATK is: Buy. [12 firms.] Mean 2008 target: $128. [high: $136, low: $120.]

Stock Analysis: Alliant Techsystems is a moderate-risk stock not suitable for low-risk investors. Investors with an investment horizon longer than 2 years should be rewarded from ATK's shares. Sell / Stop Loss if you were to purchase shares in this company: $68.

Disclosure: Lazzaro has no positions in stocks. In addition to private real estate holdings, he owns corporate and municipal bonds, and cash certificates of deposit.

Scientists at NASA plan to put one of the twin Mars rovers to sleep and limit the activities of the other robot to fulfill a NASA order to cut $4 million from the program's budget, mission team members said Monday.

The project, which was originally supposed to run for three months, is now in its fourth year, successfully exploring the terrain of Mars. It costs NASA about $20 million to keep the project going, but due to budget cuts, the space agency is forced to put its child up for adoption, so to speak. As of yet, no billionaire has stepped up to the plate, but I am hoping that someone will soon.

For the cost of a few of your average modern missiles, we are abandoning a program that has been one of NASA's most visible and productive projects.

At the current pace of usage, there exists a real threat of depletion of current domestic helium supplies. So say managers of our only national helium stockpile near Amarillo Texas. A report from Kim McGuire at the St Louis Dispatch makes clear that this reality concerns more than the just attendees of children's birthday parties and a few Donald Duck impersonators.

Scientist claim that helium reserves could be depleted in as little as ten years, a reality which worries experts in the fields of medicine, microchip manufacture, nuclear science, and Garfield balloons. Helium, which is abundant in our universe yet relatively scarce here on earth, plays a major role in many facets of industrial production. It is reported that dwindling helium supplies have driven helium prices up by as much as 50% over the past twelve months, deeply affecting companies such as Praxair, Inc. (NYSE: PX). It is also worthy of note that NASA uses massive amounts of helium annually to pressurize fuel tanks for shuttle missions.

Lee Sobotka, a chemistry and physics professor at Washington University stated "...it's incumbent upon us to have a vision, and tell it like it is, (helium is) a resource that is more strictly nonrenewable than either oil or gas."

Presently, efforts are successfully under way to make helium use more efficient and to recapture helium at it's points of use. Helium as an element can be captured as a by product of natural gas extraction but intensity in those efforts needs to be redoubled. Adding to the supply concerns currently faced are the facts that two off shore helium producers have faltered in their efforts to bring helium plants on line, and several domestic producers have shuttered domestic helium plants in recent years.

According to Wired Magazine, NASA has finally come to realize that what you say is more important than what you do. Therefore, it has asked the hive mind (the U.S. public) to suggest a new slogan to replace its bland current one, "Explore. Discover. Understand."

Among those that come to my mind are:

• Went to the Moon, invented Tang. For Mars, who knows?
• Weightless sex. Open up your wallets and make it happen.
• Earth -- we're outta here!
• From the increasingly dirty blue marble all the way to the stars!
• One small step for man, one huge debt for mankind.
• NASA: We can see your house from here.
• Look up, look down -- do you see any insulation all around?
• We play with Mercury.
• We go long.
• We decide which way's up.
• Now offering development property with out of this world views!

Add your inspirations! The best suggestion (as judged by me an impartial, anonymous judge) will receive a free space pen that writes upside down!

There's a lot of evidence that advertising and commercialism have gone too far: NPR has commercials, financial aid officers get stock in student loan companies, and the Queen of England might have to start shopping at Wal-Mart Stores (NYSE: WMT). But now, we boldly go where few have gone before -- California Congressman Ken Calvert wants to start making "NASA space assets available for commercial advertising and marketing opportunities."

I guess this is a good idea (one way to fund space exploration), but it just seems like it could get weird. Would they allow anyone to advertise? Could Playboy Enterprises (NYSE: PLA) plaster its trademark bunny across the International Space Station? Or, perhaps for a few million more, have it renamed the Playboy Space Mansion? If we are going to sell ads on the station, it should be done tastefully. But even then, I'm a little skeptical. Do we really need to be spreading materialistic consumer culture into outer space?

With the annual Federal deficit at around $300 billion, a weekly $1.5 billion cash burn in Iraq, and the National Debt a little north of $7 TRILLION, you would think our trusty lawmakers would be watching OUR pennies.

Instead, they are finding new and creative ways to waste OUR money.

The Washington Post announced this morning that "NASA Invests in Its Future with Venture Capital Firm." In a project that is called "Red Planet" but surely should have been called "Red Ink," the wise folks at NASA have set aside $75 million of your dough to fund projects so "NASA could see a lot of technical innovation" through its direct ownership in technology companies.

This idea is a screaming loser on so many levels it is almost hard to get started.

I'm one of those who believe in the the space program and agree with Stephen Hawking on the importance of space exploration. That's why I find news of NASA contracting Lockheed Martin to build the next generation spaceship somewhat encouraging; yet on careful inspection I find the process laden with politicking, with cumbersome management and technical systems and not much innovation.

Lockheed Martin Corp. (NYSE:LMT up 1.45% at the moment) won the five-year $3.9 billion contract to design and build a manned, capsule-like spacecraft called Orion. The Orion vehicle is to replace the existing space shuttle fleet. The initial $3.9 billion for the first ship could be supplanted by as much as $3.5 billion for additional spacecrafts.

Lockheed Martin beat Northrop Grumman Corp. and Boeing Co. to the contract despite Northrop Grumman's proposal appearing to be far more detailed in technical choices.