I think that Guido probably has his plate full with the open revolt over the transition to version 3.
Javascript is much closer to a halfway point to Lisp than Java. I don't really see Java as being at all similar to Lisp... witness the 3-4 year (possibly longer) debacle trying to get closures into the language. Talk about banging a square rhinoceros into a round hole.
Java's point of greatest similarity to C++ is undoubtedly Generics, which has all the syntactic disadvantages of C++ templates, but none of the meta-programming advantages.
But one of the ways of seeing that C++ and Java are quite dissimilar is to first grok Java Interfaces, and then read through the smalltalk/C++ version of the GoF book Design Patterns, with a view to how many of the Patterns don't even make sense in Java or are obsolete in Java because of Interfaces.
Nit: Halfway to somewhere, but that somewhere ain't Lisp.
I'm under-rested and under-caffeinated, but the only thing I can think of that I'd call an intentional similarity between the two languages is the fact they're both garbage collected.
I'd agree with him, given that this statement was about programmers and Java really did open the floodgates for a diversity of programming languages to become accepted, or at least tolerated.
The Java language itself, however, is not very close to Lisp at all.
Smalltalk would be a good non-snarky answer and one with some basis in history, although Smalltalk seems to have been a much stronger influence over the JVM than the Java language.
Guido is interested primarily in usability, and Python is notoriously poor in performance.
Rob Pike writes systems languages.
With Java, Gosling has written a very enterprise-friendly language, that drags C++ halfway to Lisp.