[PerConPat]

The COS approach is in Art. V for a reason...It is there to provide another check on the abuse of federal power. Whatever, if there is enough support in the states for the very serious things you point to in your third paragraph, they will happen with or without a COS.

I have read many accounts of the Constitutional convention, The Articles of Confederation, the Federalist Papers, Max Farrand etc.; and I don't recall any major disagreements amongst the founders as to the inclusion of Art V.

I have also read accounts on Justice Scalia's turn- around on "constitutional conventions". He opposed them when he felt the time was wrong politically. Well, I believe we have now entered another time in which court packing, ending filibusters, election fraud etc. may call for strong measures.

Post script: To what or to whom did the "duh" in your post refer?

[beancounter13]

My ‘duh’ reference was to liberals thought process for removing 2A.

Since you have read so much: how did the Framers decide that they could ratify the new constitution with only 9 states when the then-current constitution (i.e. The Articles) specifically stated that changes had to be approved by ‘all the states’?