I agree that one should, as a matter of principle, be consistent on this issue. If leaving the state is a valid political tactic when your side does it, then you shouldn’t complain too much when the other side does it; if you bitch and moan when the other side does it, then you shouldn’t defend your own side when they do it.
Having said said, i don’t think it’s any more silly and inconsistent, on a philosophical level, than your argument about filibustering:
While you are right that filibustering is a component of a legislative body, as a matter of principle it is no more or less a perversion of the democratic process than running away, IMO.
The fact that a legislator can stand there and drone on for hours or days about his grandmother’s apple pie recipes and the vacations he took as a child, when he’s supposed to be addressing a bill about tax increases or healthcare, is exactly as big a “fuck you” to the democratic process as not showing up in the first place. The fact that there is no mechanism to stop such irrelevant sidetracking doesn’t change the fact that it completely subverts what the democratic process is supposed to be about, which is dealing with and voting on the actual issues.
In short, you’ve drawn a spurious distinction.