But people seem to want to say all the emissions from their *own* tailpipes are big oil's fault, while ignoring that's the only way they were able to commute to work, school, fly on vacation, etc. for decades.
That was a situation deliberately created in part by big oil. Nobody is ignoring it, except that you are ignoring how it came to be.
I don't know if you're old enough to remember the last century. Like Pepperidge Farms, though, I remember as far back as the 1970s.
We had two kinds of rechargeable battery: lead-acid and nickel-cadmium. Both were, um, great for the environment. Oh, and big oil still put lead in the gasoline itself. I remember smog, too. And gas lines after the OPEC embargo. But there was no way to make a practical EV back then, so if you wanted to go faster than you or your horse could walk, there was only one way you were getting somewhere, and that's with an internal combustion engine.
Electricity could come from carbon fuels, nuclear, or hydropower. But Three Mile Island set nuclear back, and we'd pretty much run out of rivers to dam for hydro. Solar panels still sucked. Rare earth magnets and carbon fiber just weren't things yet, so wind power wasn't viable at scale. So, if you wanted electricity, odds were you were getting it from big oil, or big coal.
They were evil back then too (see tetraethyl lead). But saying they should be responsible for all end-user emissions is either saying we had viable alternatives that they somehow squashed, or that we should have stayed in the horse-drawn buggy and whale oil lamp era until we could seamlessly transition to renewables 50 years later. So, which one of those do you believe?