We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Good grammar is the sign of either a good primary education or a heavy reader. With enough reading, the reader will intuitively get transitive vs intransitive right without even knowing those terms. (The use of the subjunctive works similarly.)
I remember the difference by thinking that a transitive verb transfers the verb's force to something. Intransitives just exist. "I hit the ball" vs. "I exist."
He may not have meant to say "dispense", but should have. Or, someone in his team should have mentioned it. Althouse implying that he's dumb is a little harsh. He isn't dumb simply because he doesn't have the vocabulary of FDR or Bill Buckley, Jr. Gimme a break.
I think it's funny that they pick on Rubio for poor grammar and vocabulary, considering some of his fellow candidates.
Most grammar doesn't work the way that sentence diagramming suggests, in fact. If you want 2000 interesting pages on it, _A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language_Quirk Greenbaum Leech and Svartvik is worth a summer.
It's a descriptive grammar, or the science of what sounds right and what doesn't sound right.
The number of discoverable rules is astounding. Particularity exists in everything.
My favorite useful rules are that subjects of nonfinite verbs (verbs not carrying tense) are in the objective case, as in Latin; and "for" serves to mark the subject of a to-infinitive, far from its sentence diagramming account as a preposition.
Descriptive grammar tries to come up with what is actually happening.
You get particularity in rules -- and ease in spotting foreigners speaking English -- because learning language is learning to disassemble cliches and reassemble them (my theory), not learning words and then larger units.