This must be one of the most hypothetical questions ever...
First or all, superconducting leads do NOT have zero impedance; they have zero RESISTANCE; as soon as you try to pass an AC current there will be some reactive impedance. Hence, it is possible to "short" a superconducting circuit with a normal conductor such as water and in fact this does cause some real problems when designing superconducting electronics (some substrates are slightly conductive).
(in type II superconductors there are also losses due to flux flow, but lets ignore those for now).
Secondly, there are no known room temperature superconductors so we can only speculate when it comes to what kind of chemical properties they would have. However, all known high-temperature superconductors are perovskites i.e. oxides and are very sensitive to water; if you expose to for e.g. YBCO to water it turns grey and stops being superconducting (I don't remember what kind of chemical reaction takes place). Fewc crystalline materials can withstand being immersed in water for long periods of time (salt water kills just about everything) so it is not very likely that keeping it immered in water would be a good idea.
Thirdly, if you have a room temperature superconductor and you only use it to transmitt DC or low frequency AC signals the losses are very small meaning there is virtually no heating, so there would be probebly be no need to cool it in the first place. The only reason why nitrogen is used to cool superconducting cables today is because the thermal insulation is less than perfect, i.e. the nitrogen is mainly used to "compensate" (cool) for the heat coming IN to the cable and prevent the cable to warm up, not to cool the cable itself.