Anyone else notice that if you play a 'monster race' in 4e...

[Vyvyan Basterd]

A lot of the 'roleplaying info' text assumes that you will play your character as a 'noble and good rebel'----opposed to the racial type? For instance---all the examples of playing a Drow (from the FR Player's Handbook) indicate that the PC opposes the Drow races evil tendencies.

I think you have oversimplified the information in the FRPG. The section "Playing a Drow" gives insight into the evil society the drow have grow up with.

"Drow are born into darkness. [snip] Even drow who escape the clutches of this sinister culture find themselves scarred by the lessons they learned in their youth. [snip] Drow are never surprised when the knife appears, and they consequently find it hard to form lasting friendships."

Then the three "noble and good rebels" you mention, per the "Drow Adventurers" section, are:

A ranger that follows the Unaligned god of death, Kelmvor. He led a resistance, it does not say what his intentions were in the resistance. Was it to gain personal power? Was it because his house was practicing necromancy? And now he has a vendetta against his house. None of this automatically makes him noble or good.

A rogue who grew up being told she was going to be sacrificed to Lolth on her mother's altar. She came to hate the goddess Lolth and escaped. Now she stays on the move to evade her mother's spies. Again, none of this automatically makes her noble or good.

A feylock that seeks others that value nature and the lives of others. This example is most likely good, possibly even noble. But there's nothing saying he can't value his new friends while still regarding others with hatred. They may even give him reason through discrimination or their destruction of nature.

I think there is room for both "good and noble rebels" and "messed up because I was brought up in a purely evil society" in all three of the concepts they have presented.