I'm not sure what your point is, but if you're saying what I laid out sounds like the blueprint for a Con Con, it flew completely over your head.
A Con Con, or any 5th Amendment "cure" calls for the states acting in conjunction with Congress. It requires their co-operation. They've already demonstrated they have no interest in obeying in the Constitution; neither to the executive branch or the judiciary. Why would they want to co-operate with a bunch of uppity states? To them, state legislatures are nothing but glorified city councils.
My point is that the states should form a coalition, free and in the clear of Congress, and tell them what laws we will and won't obey; the same goes for which executive branch agencies, which SCOTUS rulings, etc. The states' coalition would not go begging, hat in hand, for Congress to please recognize delegates sent from the states to make it happen, and please pass our amendments with a 2/3 majority. The coalition would take the bull by the horns, tell Congress to go pound sand, to stick it up their pampered and perfumed kiesters, and if they don't like it, you know where to find us.
That is far from a Con Con. It would be the states, and We The People standing up and taking the reins of our Republic back from those who have driven us into a ditch.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
thanks for taking the time to try to decipher my reply, and for your discussion. While all of us are frustrated, I support pushing Article V, as written, as far as patience and conscience will allow. Failing that, I could envision circumstances that would result in the scenario you have described. But, in my opinion, that scenario would transpire with enough popular determination only after the states endure a train of abuses in their effort to convene and dispose.