Claiming that hardware can run C natively is quite a reach. Your definition of what it means to run a language natively is so broad that it encompasses a large number of programming languages (if not all of them).
It's not about the number of passes of the compiler or if a
language is supposed to be portable or not, but about
the "virtual machine" abstraction a language is assuming,
and how far is that from what typical hardware has to offer.
To run any Lisp or Python program, no matter what interpreter/compiler you use, you need to implement garbage collection, reflection, run-time code evaluation, etc.
Those features are neither light-weight, trivial nor scope-limited, unlike software routines implementing integer multiplication/division (on alpha) or a floating point emulator (on most arms) -- that are needed for a full C implementation.
And if you strip your language of those complex features,
you also lose the 10x productivity you like to claim, and
you simply get a C without pointers.