Python vs. Lisp -- please explain

[Roy Smith]

"Robert J. Hansen" <cipherpunk at gmail.com> wrote:
> LISP has a very well-defined ANSI specification.  Lots of different
> people have written LISPs, from Franz to Steel Bank to GNU to... etc.
> Each of these competes with the others on different grounds; some are
> purely interpreted (ala CLISP), some are compiled (CMUCL), some are...
> etc.  They all implement substantially the same language, but the
> plethora of different implementations has been a tremendous boon for
> the development of efficient compilers, interpreters and garbage
> collectors.

It's been a while since I've dabbled in lisp, but my recollection is that 
the plethora of different implementations has also meant that portability 
is a fantasy.

I dread the day that competing Python implementations spring up.