Silent, in armor? 
From the sound of it, Mick was pretty well oiled while singing that.
In Prove It All Night, Bruce Springsteen claims that “we’ll drive that dusty road from Monroe to Angeline”. I read on another forum I frequent that, whilst there are a number of places called Monroe, there aren’t any called Angeline. It’s not like he’s driving to a woman called Angeline either - in the next line he explains he’s in the car with his girl to buy her a gold ring and a blue dress.
Texas has both a Monroe and an Angelina. “Angeline” could be taken as a poetic contraction, along the lines of songs that refer to states called “Caroline” or “Alabam.”
Oops! nm.
This one has always bothered me:
You’ve been as constant as the Northern Star
The brightest light that shines
Sorry, Mr Rafferty, but the Northern Star is pretty wimpy, brightness-wise. (Critique notwithstanding the prospect that the songwriter may, in fact, have proffered the smilie sarcastically. If so, strong work.)
Nope. Sorry Garth, but your grade school teachers lied to you.
This.
(I put off contributing it as an example a bit too long.) :o
I don’t think so at all. There is nothing about the song as a whole that suggests any sarcastic intent, for one thing. It strikes me as a very straightforward ballad of ultimate loving devotion.
In the immediate context, (while I could nitpick about Polaris being “constant” as marking celestial north for earth) it is essentially true considering the length of a human lifetime. If Rafferty were to be sarcastic about Polaris’ apparent visual magnitude (“brightness”) being overrated, he would presumably also be referring to the technical nitpick one could make about the precession of the equinoxes, or perhaps the fact that Polaris isn’t exactly at the celestial north pole during this relative eye-wink of time that we live in. That, I am sure, is giving him far too much credit for knowledge and cleverness in sneaky sarcasm.
Besides, as you probably know, this is a fairly common misconception about Polaris. I mean, among people who take at least a passing interest in the stars. (I’m afraid that lately, with declining education and intellectual interest in America, many folks would be puzzled at the the very idea of a “Pole Star” or even why anyone at all would care.) Several years ago my local planetarium featured an entire program about various astronomical misconceptions, and this was perhaps the most striking. I wasn’t surprised about its lack of prominence, since I had already no doubt memorized the three brightest stars by that time, but I may have been mildly surprised by how far down such a list it fell. The tone of the clarification was both “You have got to be kidding about it being #1” and “Many, many people are sold on the idea, and 
probably will continue to be so!”
Nitpick, while the common interpretation is that he is calling the Northern Star the brightest light that shines, that is not the only parsing of the stanza.
He is listing traits, ways that his woman has been there for him. With tweaking of the punctuation, that reads as
“You’ve been as constant as the Northern Star.
The brightest light that shines,
it’s been you, woman,
right down the line.”
He’s comparing her constancy to the Northern Star. He’s also calling her the brightest light that shines.
While I like your alternate parsing possibility, wouldn’t that just be replacing one factual error with another? (Unless, of course, the object of his affection is the Sun, in which case, I say, again, strong work, Mr Raffertry.)
No, that’s just poetic expression. He’s not saying she literally glows light.