>Ellis's book refers to the "brothers" as the entire generation...

not at all. the "brothers" of the title are the six leading men of the revolutionary generation. the term is used to reflect the fact that, at the time of their crucial activities, they did not view themselves as fathers of anything, but as a (yes squabbling, in my term) group of compatriots who were sometimes collaborative, sometimes archly antagonistic. [you can't get much more antagonistic than Hamilton and Burr.]

as to the use by your commentator, I give up--I didn't hear her, but from your original description it didn't sound like anything to get worked up about. ; )