No. That statement alone wasn't meant as an indictment. It was part of a larger catalog of criticisms meant to refute the notion that environmentalism alone was responsbile for higher gas prices.
And oil has the luxury of being one of the world's few commodities that claims an inelastic demand supplied through a virtual monopoly. True supply-and-demand rules don't apply here. If gas cost $5 a gallon, you'd pay it. Because you HAVE to. For one, it costs $5 a gallon everywhere. And for two, your car won't run on iced tea. Oh, you might grouse about it, maybe even trade in the family barge for a blender-powered roller skate. But you'd still buy gas. And you'd pay what the profiteers demanded, regardless of how false the economics.
Indeed, I would. I would also drive a lot less, and my next car would be way more efficient than the current one.