The left, apparently, is unable to gain any traction with the new smears, so there retrying all the old ones. A case in point is Anita Hill… she of the pubic hair on the Coke can fame.
What’s interesting, is the comparison between how Clarence Thomas handles it in his book, which is actually fairly gentle with Ms. Hill, and the secondary attempt by the left to Re- quash the uppity black man who dared to step outside leftist orthodoxy by publishing yet another smear. 
Hill’s charges of Thomas throwing a large pile of unsubstantiated allegations at her, should throw just about anyone who watched those proceedings years agoto at least roll their eyes in disgust. Let’s remember the situation; hill had charged that Thomas had made her work situation unbearable. If that’s true, then why did she followed Thomas from the department of education to the EEOC? Why would she not find someone else’s wing to shelter under? Further, Hill sat on all this, for a period of ten years. Not exactly a credibility builder.
It gets better:
In the portion of his book that addresses my role in the Senate hearings into his nomination, Justice Thomas offers a litany of unsubstantiated representations and outright smears that Republican senators made about me when I testified before the Judiciary Committee â€” that I was a “combative left-winger” who was “touchy” and prone to overreacting to “slights.” A number of independent authors have shown those attacks to be baseless. What’s more, their reports draw on the experiences of others who were familiar with Mr. Thomas’s behavior, and who came forward after the hearings. It’s no longer my word against his.
Justice Thomas’s characterization of me is also hobbled by blatant inconsistencies. He claims, for instance, that I was a mediocre employee who had a job in the federal government only because he had “given it” to me. He ignores the reality: I was fully qualified to work in the government, having graduated from Yale Law School (his alma mater, which he calls one of the finest in the country), and passed the District of Columbia Bar exam, one of the toughest in the nation.
And the only problem with all of this, of course, is that it was Hill, not Thomas, who wanted the judiciary committee with a whole laundry list of unsubstantiated charges back in 91. The idea that they were unsubstantiated was even noted by the committee at the time. She had no evidence, and her testimony was self contradictory.
Frankly, Hill’s nonsense has even less credibility now than it did then. And it wasn’t much then. What all this does show, however, is the degree to which the left will go to maintain Liberal lockstep among people of color. The only diversity the left does not respect is, after all, diversity of thought. It’s the one area where diversity , in fact, it cannot be tolerated.