Such was the title of a column she wrote on January 7.
Since then, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) used the term in a February 3 piece posted at his website, and during a number of interviews on major and minor television networks.
Last Sunday, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) referred to the phrase on CBS's "Face the Nation" (video embedded below the fold):
BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: Well, you have emerged as the main opponent, I think, of the Senate--of the president's economic recovery plan, at least the version that came up in the Senate. You offered another plan about half the size of this one. It was defeated on a straight party line vote. But I want to ask you, now that you have made your point, do you intend to support this plan? Because I think economists on all sides of this say something has got to be done here.
SENATOR JOHN McCAIN: Well, I can't, Bob. And I can't because I think it's the greatest transfer of not only spending, but authority and responsibility to government. I think it's massive, it's much larger than any measure that was taken during the Great Depression. I think it has policy changes in it which are fundamentally bad for America. For example, their "buy America" provisions. That's protectionism. It didn't work at any time in our history. But most of all, because I think this can only be described as generational theft. What we are doing is amassing multitrillions of dollars, if you look at what's going to be announced Monday or Tuesday, a new TARP. We've already spent 700 billion; another how many, half a trillion or more.
"Generational Theft Act" already generates almost 40,000 results in a Google search.
Most delicious, the term is beginning to anger the extreme left.
What do you think of this nickname? Does it accurately express what President Obama is about to sign into law on Tuesday?
