You mean the one time, against Abe Fortas for Chief Justice? That was hardly comparable. Fortas did not have the support of a majority of senators, and his filibuster was a bipartisan affair, with Southern Democrats and Republicans joining forces.
From Infoplease
President Johnson nominated Fortas as chief justice of the United States; Republicans and Southern Democrats held a Senate filibuster against the nomination, causing President Johnson to withdraw Fortas's nomination. The following year, Fortas resigned from the court after it was revealed that he had, while on the bench, accepted $20,000 from a private foundation; the money was part of a life stipend to Fortas by the foundation. Although he returned the money, Fortas resigned from the court under public pressure, the first justice to do so.
Guess what you are telling me is there are good filibusters (Republican) and bad ones (Democrat). I do notice that Leahy is telling a different story:
http://www.leahy.senate.gov/issues/nominations/pastfilibusters.html
Regardless, however, any Republican use of the filibuster seems to cloud the issue of right and wrong.