The few, the not-so-proud?

So here's an interesting story. It's been on the front page of the New Mexican lately as it involves a guy from NM, but I haven't really paid much attention to it (as I generally disregard everything in that paper - it's either local human interest stories or wire pieces). It finally caught my interest today.

This guy Adam Kokesh joins the Marines. He goes and serves in Iraq, then gets to come home with an honorable discharge. He's not, however, entirely free of the military; he's in the "individual reserves", which means keeping Big Brother Sam informed as to where you are, and they can summon you back to active duty essentially whenever they see fit.

Kokesh has, at some point, decided he's not OK with America's actions in Iraq. He takes to protesting. He, on at least once occasion, does so wearing his military-issue camo, but he's stripped it of all military insignia as far as possible. There's a Marines emblem embroidered into the fabric, but other than that there's nothing identifying him as a (former) Marine.

Then someone from the Marines sees a picture of Kokesh at said protest. It is technically against regulations for a member of the US armed services to protest while in uniform. They decide that A) Kokesh is still a member of the Marines, despite not being anywhere near on active duty, and B) he needs to be disciplined.

So in order to do so, they had a trial and retroactively 'downgraded' his discharge, from honorable to general. I'm not certain if this has any true significance - it apparently isn't expected to effect his benefits - but regardless, it's kind of a sleazy thing to do. My objections can pretty much be divided into three categories:

1. Why the hell are the people who are allegedly fighting for our "freedom" and in support of democracy and such not given, y'know, basic American freedoms? By this point I know it's hopelessly idealistic but I can't quite rid myself of the hope that, someday, our military (which is composed entirely of people who've sworn or affirmed to "support and uphold the Constitution" will in fact have to follow the rules set down in the Constitution.
2. This reeks of the military trying to cover itself up so that, a hundred and fifty years down the line once society is rebuilding itself from the disaster we're racing towards, people don't look at this incident and say, "Dear god those people were jerks." He didn't do anything wrong or offensive; he did something extremely "patriotic" and is being unjustly punished for it because his higher-ups disagree with him. And if anyone would argue that protesting against things your government does that you think are wrong, I'd like to direct you here.
3. Sweet bleeding Jesus, between Iraq and Afghanistan do the Marines not have anything truly important to do?