To add to that and concur that Rich generally doesn't have such un-nuanced strong opinions without context, see his talk Effective Programs. He explains what Clojure is good for and isn't good for, and says more clearly it so depends on what you're doing.
He doesn't organize the Clojure conferences, but I'd imagine that if he didn't see any value in any context for static typing, there wouldn't have been a talk about Typed Racket and static typing researchers as keynote speakers, etc.
And FWIW, spec is a library trying to come as close as possible to the imaginary midpoint of static and dynamic typing, but in a Clojure-y way.
He doesn't organize the Clojure conferences, but I'd imagine that if he didn't see any value in any context for static typing, there wouldn't have been a talk about Typed Racket and static typing researchers as keynote speakers, etc.
And FWIW, spec is a library trying to come as close as possible to the imaginary midpoint of static and dynamic typing, but in a Clojure-y way.