What I've found useful for reading Nietzsche is not to take him as a philosopher, but as a critic of 19th century German society. Nietzsche's writing has value not just for whatever philosophy he brings to the table but also in the literary value of how he is writing.

He does say some valuable things, philosophically. For instance, his defeat of the idea of "causa sui" (the idea that human action is self-caused) is rather poignant:

"The causa sui is the best self-contradiction that has been conceived so far ... it is a sort of rape and perversion of logic. But the extravagant pride of man has managed to entangle itself profoundly and frightfully with just this nonsense. The desire for 'freedom of the will' in the superlative metaphysical sense, which still holds sway [still does], unfortunately, in the minds of the half-educated; the desire to bear the entire and ultimate responsibility for one's actions oneself, and to absolve God, the world, ancestors, change, and society involves nothing less than to be precisely this causa sui and, with more than Baron Munchhausen's audacity [I don't know who that is], to pull oneself up into existence by the hair, out of the swamps of nothingness..."

However, you're right that other things he writes are absolutely repugnant. His slave/master morality, for instance, is a disgusting fallacy that says much more about Germany in the time he wrote than fundamental human nature.

I guess what I'm saying is, take Nietzsche with a grain of salt.