Matthew Yglesias highlights the presence of offensive signs at “tea party” protests yesterday and notes that “the TV coverage I saw of the parties didn’t make any mention of the presence of so many signs with a clear racial subtext” (see also Dana Milbank’s report on the DC protest). I have to say I’m bored with offensive sign blogging, which also shows up on conservative blogs after anti-war protests. The problem is that virtually any mass political protest or demonstration attracts crazy people with hateful and offensive signs. A presidential campaign would generally confiscate the worst signs, but decentralized protests (like the “tea parties,” anti-war protests, etc.) usually do not, so where do you draw the line as to when the signs are newsworthy?