Aside from the genuine horror that hard-line conservatives are feeling about Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court, one of the most delightful details of this story is a small piece of gossip.

According to one blog, wonk ette.com, Miers and U.S. Circuit Judge Priscilla Owen were once vying for the affections of Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht when things turned ugly. Since we now know that Miers and Hecht were longtime companions, Miers apparently won.

The image of this Southern, Christian lady elbowing out the much younger Owen, maybe even telling her to "hit the road, honey," implies a certain amount of chutzpah on the part of the nominee I find appealing.

In fact, a number of the traits Miers is being criticized for I view as positive. Her "inferior" academic credentials, for example. Unlike John G. Roberts, Miers attended modest old Southern Methodist University and never clerked for a Supreme Court justice. The court's already crawling with Harvard graduates and is not supposed to be a Harvard alumni group. Alongside Antonin Scalia's tortured intellectualism, a down-to-earth perspective should be refreshing.

Or that Miers has no experience as a judge. We've learned that some outstanding Supreme Court justices were first-timers. My main reason for opposing Clarence Thomas, who'd been a judge for only a short time when he was nominated to the court, wasn't his lack of experience, but his proven mediocrity in the jobs he had held. By contrast, Miers' work history, from a private law firm up to counsel to the president, has been one of steady achievement and upward mobility.

Her opposition to abortion and homosexuality disturbs me, but those views appear to be the product of her Christian evangelical religion, not a legal philosophy. And, although I find Christian evangelicals pretty scary as a group, that doesn't necessarily mean she'll allow her religious beliefs to trump her interpretation of the Constitution. Miers did pro bono work on behalf of the Dallas poor and was considered fair by the city's black politicians. Like the head of one national gay and lesbian rights group, I'm "cautiously optimistic" about her.

Then there's the view that, because she's never married, there must be something wrong with her. I initially thought that about David Souter, but, fortunately, Souter turned out all right.

What impresses me most about Miers is her history as a female pioneer in the legal profession in 1970s Texas. Texas is a state where men are men and women tend to be deferential, and being one of a handful of women lawyers in the state must have caused suspicion and resentment.

Yet, Miers was hired as the first woman at her Dallas law firm and wound up being its president. And she went on to become the first woman president of the Dallas Bar Association and of the Texas state bar, feats that must have required the legal, diplomatic and social skills of an Elizabeth Dole, but without Dole's homecoming-queen looks.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts has gone through life as a member of the wealthy, white, male, prep-school and Ivy League elite, and throughout his legal career has seemed to lack empathy for minorities and outsiders. Miers' experience must have left her more humble.

If she's confirmed as expected, she'll be voting on some thorny issues currently before the court: abortion rights, state right-to-die laws, gay rights, the legality of the military commissions deciding the fate of Guantanamo detainees, and whether a religious group has the right to import hallucinogenic drugs for use in its services, among other things. I hope Miers' life experience will help her view these issues with an open mind, although, as we know, with almost any new justice, it's a crapshoot.

Sheryl McCarthy is a Newsday columnist.