There may be better ways to help the people who need it etc, etc... The problem is that you didn't really give any specifics, at least not in your original post.
First, your thread title makes a very big assumption, "A second stimulus check is usless". It can be interpreted as a judgment and by the looks of the response, many people took it as such. The number of times you had to write, "Re-read my post" also says something about the clarity. There will always be some misunderstanding and different interpretations, but when a sizable chunk of people are responding in the same way, it might be what or how you wrote the post rather than how people are reading it.
The way I read your post, you say that "we have to help the people who cannot work now, and the small businesses that remain closed..." I understand that you are saying that money should be focused on those who are hardest hit by the situation. I agree that those who are suffering the most should get the most help.
The problem is determining who is "suffering the most". The airlines were hemorrhaging money and no one was flying. There was money set aside for them, but then they use it for stock buybacks and not to pay to retain staff. SO, they are definitely suffering, but they used any stimulus to keep their shareholders and executives paid, but not the average worker. Same with many other corporations who received money.
People are absolutely using the money that they get to "stimulate the economy" in their way. People above a certain threshold of money (I am not sure what that threshold is but I can tell you it isn't 50,000 or even 100,000) do not need a 1200 dollar check, but depending on where you live, it can pay partial rent, food, or some other necessity.
If you want to make the argument that there are better ways to help people, then make the case. Make suggestions about what can be done.
For example, have everyone register with their local government to discuss their economic situation. If they are struggling to make rent because they have been laid off or have reduced hours and salary, then they need to list it. Tell the city/county/state government who your landlord is and the fed/state/local government can work out a way to provide at least half, if not all of your rent for a few months. Another example that may help many middle class families, forgive student loan debt. Not having to shell out 1000+ dollars a month would help people to prioritize spending and saving.
Finally, like I mentioned, it isn't just people who are not working and business that are closed by health necessity that are struggling. People who make good money typically, have taken reductions in pay. I have personally taken a substantial pay cut, though I still have my job. My wife who was also making decent money, has been laid off. We are doing better than many people, but to say that we do not need assistance and the implication that only the people who are completely shut down who should get help, feels like a judgement. Everyone, except the wealthiest among us, are suffering through this situation.
You are right that the GOP's efforts in this process are not in good faith. They are looking at this from a primarily if not completely political stand point. They are trying to buy votes. Democrats however, are trying to distribute money equitably in a complex situation. The problem is that people with a lot of money, have more resources to lobby and procure even more money and often do not care about the average citizen until the pain trickles up to them, which takes quite awhile.
We do need a way to better target and distribute financial assistance. What are your suggestions?
= new reply since forum marked as read
I do use Amazon, but I try to use a local option if available. 
