>>20
There is nothing Lisp can do, that C can't, it's just that some things are considerably a lot more work than normal. You have very fine control of how compilation/evaluation works in Lisp, as opposed to C, and the language's homoiconicity allows for useful stuff like macros or meta-circular evaluators. Here's a very distilled example I posted in another thread not long ago:
http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1254286846/19
You can greenspun everything in C, but with a lot more effort than if you were to just use Lisp. Why would you go to such effort, when there's perfectly good solutions already exist?
A whole class of problems can be made much easier by defining your own DSL's, which you can only very clumsily(and not in all cases) do in C using preprocessor macros(and it looks ugly and has many limits). So I'll throw back a question at you, why code it in C and spend so much time and effort to do something that can be done much easily in a Lisp-based language? (Even other high-level languages make it much easier, but few to none have the power that Lisp macros offer).