When I read articles that are using words like "spooky" and "weird" as terms of art, and using Schrödinger's cat as a way to clarify a topic, I get nothing out of it. And I'd like to be able to explain to my mom what this stuff is.
I read this book in high-school and learned about as much as I did in 4 undergrad physics courses about quantum mechanics. There's no mathematics in this book, so it doesn't teach you how to calculate anything (for this, a physics degree helps), but the principles are presented very nicely.
http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/11/q-according-to-the-...
http://www.askamathematician.com/2010/10/q-copenhagen-or-man...
http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/08/q-are-there-example...
http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/11/entanglement-omnibu...
http://www.askamathematician.com/2010/06/q-how-it-is-that-be...
† The Nature article characterises the Many-Worlds Interpretation like this:
"In the many-worlds picture, the wavefunction governs the evolution of reality so profoundly that whenever a quantum measurement is made, the Universe splits into parallel copies."
The first of the links above explains that this is a mischaracterisation.
Check http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/ and see if it works for you.
Otherwise, you are in the realm of popularizers like John Gribbin, who I found entertaining but not very enlightening.
Aside, the terms "spooky" and "weird" are used to describe phenomena that "have no classical analogue." Physicists don't agree on what Schrödinger's cat means. I find that it muddles more than it clarifies.
They're kinna mathy, but a lot easier to understand than similar lectures from physicists (because the background knowledge is much greater)
And goes into greater depth in the Douglas Robb Memorial Lectures series: http://vega.org.uk/video/subseries/8
If you want to go all the way down the rabbit hole there's an exhaustive list of Feynman videos here :) http://www.richard-feynman.net/videos.htm