The love doctor is now in

All that wasted money on candy and flowers ...

Those books available that teach a man the proper way to treat a woman? Bogus. The lessons my father taught me about being a man and respecting women? Hah! Alan Alda and all that sensitive hoo-ha? Lies.

It appears once again, as is all so often the case, that the source of true wisdom in this world belongs to the fine people of California. This lesson centers around the delicate art of romance, and our teacher is one Christian Leroy Lindblad, of San Bernardino. Mr. Lindblad, you see, well ... let me quote the AP story.

“A woman says she still plans to marry the man who shot her in the groin and then held her hostage in his family’s garage for six days.”


Oh, Christian Leroy Lindblad, you are a regular Don Juan. And crafty, as well. In order to cover up the shooting, Lindblad reportedly treated his special gal with home remedies. Police allege that Lindblad and his parents also threatened the woman’s young sons and her family if she went to the authorities. Well, Lindblad was eventually arrested and pleaded guilty to attempted murder. He was sentenced to 20 years in the big house for his unorthodox, but apparently successful, flirting techniques.

Twenty years is nothing. These kids are in love, folks.

As perplexed as I am regarding this wooing ritual, I’m equally puzzled by the comments of Tina Marie Stebbins, the woman who was shot by Cupid’s arrow (or, to be more specific, Lindblad’s bullet).

“I want to tell you all that I have forgiven Christian,” Stebbins wrote in a statement. “And I pray that Christian has forgiven me for failing him when he needed me most.”

Failing him? What did you do wrong? Duck?

I get the whole “bad boy” thing. Trust me, I lived off that one for years. And I know all about the women who are attracted to men who remind them of their fathers, even if the man might be just as miserable as her father was. I even understand the women who like to tick off their fathers by dating someone socially and economically beneath them (again, that one was always pretty good to me).

But isn’t there a line? And, assuming there is, can’t we include being shot in the groin as probably crossing over said line? I’m pretty certain if I was dating a woman and she fired off a firearm at my groin I’d ... well, I’d cry a lot. Then there’d probably be some thumb-sucking and loud shrills for my mommy. My God, I remember one time when I simply got kicked in that area during a football game ...

But I digress.

Let’s just say I’d probably break it off with a girl who shot me in the crabcakes. I’m fairly patient, and I’m all for my partner being able to express herself freely and enjoy her individualism, but let’s keep live ammunition and my, um, stuff, out of this.

Is the dating pool truly this shallow? Has it really reached a point in this wacky world where a young woman gets shot in the groin and has the lives of her children threatened by the shooter and his family and still decides, “Well, he’s still a man. And he’s all mine.”?

Maureen Dowd, noted columnist for “The New York Times,” recently wrote a book called “Are Men Necessary: When Sexes Collide.” Dowd argues that men are not interested in smart women and that smart women don’t really need men in order to be fulfilled. She states that men will become strictly “ornamental” accessories for women in the future.

I agree with you guys. It sounds like Dowd can’t get a date.

Actually, that didn’t have anything to do with my column. I just wanted to take a slap at this book she’s hawking.

What truly grabs me about this shooting love story — well, along with the actual shooting in the groin and subsequent pledge of nuptuals — is the role of the parents. Not just the parents who allegedly helped their son cover up the incident, but also Stebbins’ parents. How do they not move her to northern Alaska and get her away from this psycho?

Well, that and how this guy’s getting a wife, and Sam Harvey is still single.